L W
DERNIST
S LAM 1840-I94C
A Sourcebook
Edited by
Charles Kijrzman
MODERNIST ISLAM, 1840-1940
This page intentionally left blank
MODERNIST ISLAM,
1840-1940
A SOURCEBOOK
Edited by CHARLES KURZMAN
OXTORD
UNIVERSITY PRESS
2002
OXFORD
UNIVERSITY PRESS
Oxford New York
Auckland Bangkok Buenos Aires Cape Town Chennai
Dar es Salaam Delhi Hong Kong Istanbul Karachi Kolkata
Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Mumbai Nairobi
Sao Paulo Taipei Tokyo Toronto
Copyright © 2002 by Oxford University Press, Inc.
Published by Oxford University Press, Inc.
198 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10016
www.oup.com
Oxford is a registered trademark of Oxford University Press
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means,
electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise,
without the prior permission of Oxford University Press.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Modernist Islam, 1840-1940 : a sourcebook, edited by Charles Kurzman.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and indexes.
ISBN 0-19-515467-3; 0-19-515468-1 (pbk.)
1. Islamic renewal—History—19th century. 2. Islamic renewal—History—20th century.
3. Islamic countries—Intellectual life—19th century. 4. Islamic countries—Intellectual
life—20th century. I. Kurzman, Charles. II. Title.
BP60 .M55 2002
297’.09'04—dc21 2002022046
The editors thank the original copyright holders for permission to re-publish the works in this
anthology. We thank the Noor Research Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill for their financial support.
We thank Ihsan ‘Abbas, Edward A. Allworth, Ali Badran, Margot Badran, Niyazi Berkes,
Leon Carl Brown, Kenneth Cragg, Hager El Hadidi, Raghda El Essawi, Howard L. Goodman,
Abu Bakar Hamzah, Achmad Jainuri, Emi Haryanti Kahli, Nikki R. Keddie, Lathiful Khuluq,
Javed Majeed, Helena Malikyar, Ishaq Masa’ad, Akhmad Minhadji, Natalie Mobini-Kesheh,
Ken Petersen, Samiha Sidhom Peterson, Lisa Pollard, Christopher Shackle, Durlab Singh,
Devin Stewart, Christian W. Troll, and Yektan Tiirkyilmaz as well as our fellow editors, for
their fine translations.
We thank Butrus Abu-Manneh, Engin Akarli, Louis Brener, Daniel W. Brown,
Abdelwahab El-Affendi, Carl W. Ernst, Paulo Fernando de Moraes Farias, Thomas
Hinnebusch, Hasan Javadi, Ahmet T. Karamustafa, Enes Karic, Bruce B. Lawrence, Roman
Loimeier, Ma Haiyun, Hossein Modarressi, Ebrahim Moosa, Henry Munson, R. Sean O’Fahey,
Shantanu Phukan, Stefan Reichmuth, Saba Risaluddin, Heba Mostafa Risk, Andrew Robarts,
David W. Robinson, William R. Roff, Holly Shissler, Devin Stewart, Amin Tarzi, Mohamad
Tavakoli-Targhi, lbrahima Thioub, Ghulam Vahed, John O. Voll, and Muhammad Qasim
Zaman for their kind advice and assistance.
987654321
Printed in the United States of America
on acid-free paper
Contents by Region
Introduction 3
Section I . Africa
Chapter I
Rifa‘a Rafi‘ al-Tahtawi
Egypt, 1801-1873 31
Chapter 2
Khayr al-Din
Tunisia, 1822-1890 40
Chapter 3
Muhammad ‘Abduh
Egypt, 1849-1905 50
Chapter 4
Qasim Amin
Egypt, 1863-1908 61
Chapter 5
Bahithat al-Badiya
Egypt, 1886-1918 70
Chapter 6
Muhammad Rashid Rida
Lebanon-Egypt, 1865-1935 77
Chapter 7
Shaykh al-Amin bin ‘Ali al-Mazrui
Kenya, 1890-1947 86
Chapter 8
Abdullah Abdurahman
South Africa, 1870-1940 90
Chapter 9
‘Abd al-Hamid Ibn Badis
Algeria, 1889-1940 93
Chapter 10
Muhammad Ahmad Mahjub
Sudan, 1908-1976 96
Section 2. Iran/Afghanistan
Chapter I I
Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani
Iran, 1838-1897 103
Chapter 12
Mirza Malkum Khan
Iran, 1833-1908 111
Chapter 13
Muhammad Husayn Na'ini
Iran, 1860-1936 116
vi Contents by Region
Chapter 14
Mahmud Tarzi
Afghanistan, 1865-1933 126
Section 3. Ottoman Empire
Chapter 15
‘Abd al-Qadir al-Jaza’iri
Algeria-Syria, circa 1807-1883 133
Chapter 16
Ali Suavi
Turkey, 1839-1878 138
Chapter 17
Namik Kemal
Turkey, 1840-1888 144
Chapter 18
§emseddin Sami Frasheri
Albania-Turkey, 1850-1904 149
Chapter 19
‘Abd al-Rahman al-Kawakibi
Syria, 1854-1902 152
Chapter 20
Mahmud Shukri al-Alusi
Iraq, 1857-1924 158
Chapter 21
Abdullah Cevdet
Turkey, 1869-1932 172
Chapter 22
Musa Kazim
Turkey, 1858-1920 175
Chapter 23
Jamal al-Din al-Qasimi
Syria, 1866-1914 181
Chapter 24
Mansurizade Sa‘id
Turkey, 1864-1923 188
Chapter 25
Ziya Gokalp
Turkey, 1876-1924 192
Chapter 26
Dzemaluddin Causevid
Bosnia, 1870-1938 198
Chapter 27
‘Abd al-Qadir al-Maghribi
Lebanon, 1867-1956 207
Chapter 28
Halide Edib Adivar
Turkey, 1882-1964 215
Section 4. Russian Empire
Chapter 29
Ismail Bey Gasprinskii
Crimea, 1851-1914 223
Chapter 30
Munawwar Qari
Turkistan-Uzbekistan, 1878-1931 227
Chapter 31
Ahmed Aghayev
Azerbaijan, 1869-1939 229
Chapter 32
Abdullah Bubi
Tatarstan, 1871-1922 232
Chapter 33
Rizaeddin bin Fakhreddin
Tatarstan, 1858-1936 238
Chapter 34
Abdurrauf Fitrat
Bukhara-Uzbekistan, 1886-1938 244
Chapter 35
Musa Jarullah Bigi
Tatarstan, 1875-1949 254
Chapter 36
Mahmud Khoja Behbudiy
Turkistan-Uzbekistan, 1874-1919 257
Chapter 37
Abdulhamid Sulayman Cholpan
Turkistan-Uzbekistan, 1893-1938 264
Contents by Region vii
Section 5. South Asia
Chapter 38
Khwaja Altaf Hussein Hali
North India, 1837-1914 273
Chapter 39
Chiragh ‘Ali
North India, 1844-1895 277
Chapter 40
Sayyid Ahmad Khan
North India, 1817-1898 291
Chapter 41
Muhammad Iqbal
North India, 1877-1938 304
Chapter 42
Muhammad Abdul Khader Maulavi
Malabar, 1873-1932 314
Chapter 43
Ameer ‘Ali
Bengal, 1849-1928 316
Chapter 44
Abu’l-Kalam Azad
Bengal-India, 1888-1958 325
Chapter 45
Muhammad Akram Khan
Bengal-Pakistan, 1868-1968 334
Section 6. Southeast/East Asia
Chapter 46
Al-Imam newspaper
Singapore, 1906-1908 339
Chapter 47
Achmad Dachlan
Java, 1868-1923 344
Chapter 48
Syekh Ahmad Surkati
Sudan-Java, 1872-1943 349
Chapter 49
Hadji Agus Salim
Sumatra-Java, 1884-1954 355
Chapter 50
Ahmad Hassan
Singapore-Indonesia, 1888-1958 360
Chapter 51
Muhammad Hasyim Asy’ari
Java, 1871-1947 365
Chapter 52
Ya'qub Wang Jingzhai
China, 1879-1949 368
Glossary 377
Index of Quranic Citations 379
Index of Personal Names 381
This page intentionally left blank
Contents by Theme
Cultural Revival
Chapter 7
Shaykh al-Amin bin ‘Ali al-Mazrui
Kenya, 1890-1947 86
Chapter 10
Muhammad Ahmad Mahjub
Sudan, 1908-1976 96
Chapter 14
Mahmud Tarzi
Afghanistan, 1865-1933 126
Chapter 19
‘Abd al-Rahman al-Kawakibi
Syria, 1854-1902 152
Chapter 21
Abdullah Cevdet
Turkey, 1869-1932 172
Chapter 29
Ismail Bey Gasprinskii
Crimea, 1851-1914 223
Chapter 30
Munawwar Qari
Turkistan-Uzbekistan, 1878-1931 227
Chapter 33
Rizaeddin bin Fakhreddin
Tatarstan, 1858-1936 238
Chapter 35
Musa Jarullah Bigi
Tatarstan, 1875-1949 254
Chapter 36
Mahmud Khoja Behbudiy
Turkistan-Uzbekistan, 1874-1919 257
Chapter 38
Khwaja Altaf Hussein Hali
North India, 1837-1914 273
Chapter 41
Muhammad Iqbal
North India, 1877-1938 304
Chapter 46
Al-Imam newspaper
Singapore, 1906-1908 339
Chapter 47
Achmad Dachlan
Java, 1868-1923 344
x Contents by Theme
Chapter 49
Hadji Agus Salim
Sumatra-Java, 1884-1954 355
Chapter 25
Ziya Gokalp
Turkey, 1876-1924 192
Chapter 52
Ya'qub Wang Jingzhai
China, 1879-1949 368
Chapter 31
Ahmed Aghayev
Azerbaijan, 1869-1939 229
Political Reform
Chapter 1
Rifa'a Raft' al-Tahtawi
Egypt, 1801-1873 31
Chapter 2
Khayr al-Din
Tunisia, 1822-1890 40
Chapter 41
Muhammad Iqbal
North India, 1877-1938 304
Chapter 44
AbuT-Kalam Azad
Bengal-India, 1888-1958 325
Religious Interpretation
Chapter 8
Abdullah Abdurahman
South Africa, 1870-1940 90
Chapter 3
Muhammad ‘Abduh
Egypt, 1849-1905 50
Chapter 9
‘Abd al-Hamid Ibn Badis
Algeria, 1889-1940 93
Chapter 6
Muhammad Rashid Rida
Lebanon-Egypt, 1865-1935 77
Chapter 12
Mirza Malkum Khan
Iran, 1833-1908 111
Chapter 1 1
Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani
Iran, 1838-1897 103
Chapter 13
Muhammad Husayn Na'ini
Iran, 1860-1936 116
Chapter 15
‘Abd al-Qadir al-Jaza’iri
Algeria-Syria, circa 1807-1883
Chapter 1 6
Ali Suavi
Turkey, 1839-1878 138
Chapter 20
Mahmud Shukri al-Alusi
Iraq, 1857-1924 158
Chapter 17
Namik Kemal
Turkey, 1840-1888 144
Chapter 22
Musa Kazim
Turkey, 1858-1920 175
Chapter 19
‘Abd al-Rahman al-Kawakibi
Syria, 1854-1902 152
Chapter 23
Jamal al-Din al-Qasimi
Syria, 1866-1914 181
Chapter 22
Musa Kaztm
Turkey, 1858-1920 175
Chapter 32
Abdullah Bubi
Tatarstan, 1871-1922 232
133
Contents by Theme
Chapter 39
Chiragh ‘ Ali
North India, 1844-1895 277
Chapter 40
Sayyid Ahmad Khan
North India, 1817-1898 291
Chapter 42
Muhammad Abdul Khader Maulavi
Malabar, 1873-1932 314
Chapter 45
Muhammad Akram Khan
Bengal-Pakistan, 1868-1968 334
Chapter 48
Syekh Ahmad Surkati
Sudan-Java, 1872-1943 349
Chapter 50
Ahmad Hassan
Singapore-Indonesia, 1888-1958 360
Chapter 51
Muhammad Hasyim Asy’ari
Java, 1871-1947 365
Science and Education
Chapter I I
Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani
Iran, 1838-1897 103
Chapter 18
§emseddin Sami Frasheri
Albania-Turkey, 1850-1904 149
Chapter 34
Abdurrauf Fitrat
Bukhara-Uzbekistan, 1886-1938 244
Chapter 37
Abdulhamid Sulayman Cholpan
Turkistan-Uzbekistan, 1893-1938 264
Chapter 43
Ameer ‘Ali
Bengal, 1849-1928 316
Women's Rights
Chapter 4
Qasim Amin
Egypt, 1863-1908 61
Chapter 5
Bahithat al-Badiya
Egypt, 1886-1918 70
Chapter 24
Mansurizade Sa’id
Turkey, 1864-1923 188
Chapter 26
Dzemaluddin Causevic
Bosnia, 1870-1938 198
Chapter 27
‘Abd al-Qadir al-Maghribi
Lebanon, 1867-1956 207
Chapter 28
Halide Edib Adivar
Turkey, 1882-1964 215
Glossary 377
Index of Quranic Citations 379
Index of Personal Names 381
This page intentionally left blank
Section Editors
Africa
Randall Pouwels (East Africa)
Emad Eldin Shahin (North Africa)
Iran I Afghanistan
Charles Kurzman (Iran)
Helena Malikyar (Afghanistan)
Mahmoud Sadri (Iran)
Ottoman Empire
David D. Commins (Levant)
M. §iikrii Hanioglu (Turkey)
Joseph G. Rahme (Levant)
A. Kevin Reinhart (Turkey)
Itzchak Weismann (Levant)
Asim Zubcevic (Bosnia)
Russian Empire
Audrey L. Altstadt (Caucasus)
Ahmet Kanlidere (Tatarstan)
Adeeb Khalid (Central Asia)
Edward J. Lazzerini (Crimea)
South Asia
Marcia K. Hermansen (South Asia)
Roland E. Miller (Malabar)
Sufia Uddin (Bengal)
Southeast/East Asia
Zvi A. Ben-Dor (China)
Howard M. Federspiel (Southeast Asia)
Michael F. Laffan (Singapore)
Jonathan N. Lipman (China)
This page intentionally left blank
MODERNIST ISLAM, 1840-1940
FINDING REASONS FOR THE CONSTITUTION IN THE KORAN
(FROM “MULLA NASIRUD-DIN THE PERSIAN “PUNCH )
Source: Eustache de Lorey and Douglas Sladen, The Moon of the Fourteenth
Night: Being the Private Life of an Unmarried Diplomat in Persia during the
Revolution (London: Hurst & Blackett, 1910), p. 98.
Charles Kurzman
Introduction:
The Modernist Islamic Movement
Edouard Valmont was a French diplomat serving in
Tehran, Iran, when a constitutionalist movement
erupted and came to power in 1906. This movement,
combining religious and secular forces, argued that
Islam was compatible with democratic principles.
Valmont was bemused. In a ghostwritten memoir, he
held that Iranians, even apparently enlightened ones,
suffer “the lack of real comprehension of the spirit of
the Constitution.” 1
As evidence of the difficulty modem institutions
faced in an Islamic country, Valmont’ s memoir included
a cartoon, reproduced at left, showing a clerical figure
pointing with one hand to the Qur’an and holding up
his other hand to block curious onlookers from peek¬
ing. The caption read: “Finding reasons for the consti¬
tution in the Koran (from ‘Mulla Nasir-ud-din[,’] the
Persian ‘Punch’).” The message seems clear: Muslims
may claim that Islam supports constitutionalism, but
such claims don’t bear close scrutiny.
It is, rather, Valmont’s use of this cartoon that
doesn’t bear scrutiny. The original—published with
a slightly different drawing in Mulla Nasruddin, the
famed satirical journal of Baku, Azerbaijan—had
an entirely different caption. It read, in Azeri Turk¬
ish: “I cure the ill by writing down verses [from the
1. Eustache de Lorey and Douglas Sladen, The Moon of
the Fourteenth Night: Being the Private Life of an Unmar¬
ried Diplomat in Persia during the Revolution (London: Hurst
& Blackett, 1910), p. 156. “Valmont” was a pseudonym.
Qur’an].” 2 The cartoon said nothing about consti¬
tutionalism, but rather mocked an old-fashioned re¬
ligious practice. Valmont saw an image lampoon¬
ing an Islamic scholar and inverted its meaning,
from antitraditionalism to antimodernism.
Valmont’s suspicion of modernist Islam was com¬
mon among Christians, even among scholars who
studied Islam. Duncan Black Macdonald (United
States, 1863-1943), for example, wrote in 1903 that
Islam does not allow constitutionalism because the
caliph “cannot set up beside himself a constitutional
assembly and give it rights against himself. He is the
successor of Muhammad and must rule, within [di¬
vine] limitations, as an absolute monarch.” 3 Yet within
a few years of that statement, some of the leading
scholars of the Islamic world were arguing exactly the
contrary. Muhammad ‘Abduh (Egypt, 1849-1905; see
chapter 3)—the highest-ranking religious official in
Egypt—wrote privately in 1904 that he supported
a parliamentary democracy. 4 In 1908, Mehmed
Cemaleddin Efendi (Turkey, 1848-1917)—the chief
religious authority of the Ottoman Empire, appointed
2. Mulla Nasruddin, September 22, 1906, pp. 4-5. Trans¬
lation from Azeri by Mahmoud Sadri.
3. Duncan B. Macdonald. The Development of Moslem
Theology, Jurisprudence, and Constitutional Theory (New
York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1903), p. 58.
4. Malcolm H. Kerr, Islamic Reform: The Political and
Legal Theories of Muhammad 'Abduh and Rashid Rida (Berke¬
ley: University of California Press. 1966), pp. 147-148.
3
4 Introduction
directly by the caliph—said that he too supported con¬
stitutionalism. 5 Also in 1908, two senior scholars of
Shi‘i Islam telegraphed their support at a crucial mo¬
ment in Iran’s Constitutional Revolution: “We would
like to know if it would be possible to execute Islamic
provisions without a constitutional regime!” 6
Macdonald’s blanket statement about the incom¬
patibility of Islam and constitutionalism also ignored,
or dismissed, the half-century’s crescendo of propos¬
als for Islamic constitutionalism. These proposals
formed part of a movement that generated tremen¬
dous intellectual ferment throughout the Islamic
world in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.
This movement sought to reconcile Islamic faith and
modem values such as constitutionalism, as well as
cultural revival, nationalism, freedom of religious in¬
terpretation, scientific investigation, modern-style
education, women’s rights, and a bundle of other
themes discussed later in this introduction (see also
the Contents by Theme). The authors and activists
engaged in this movement saw the tension between
Islamic faith and modern values as a historical acci¬
dent, not an inherent feature of Islam. The modern
period both required and permitted this accident to
be repaired: the threat of European domination made
repair necessary, and the modem values associated
with European domination made repair possible. The
modernist Islamic movement pioneered the forma¬
tion or reformation of educational institutions; agi¬
tation for political liberalization or decolonization;
and the establishment of a periodical press through¬
out the Islamic world.
One defining characteristic of this movement was
the self-conscious adoption of “modem” values—
that is, values that authors explicitly associated with
the modern world, especially rationality, science,
constitutionalism, and certain forms of human equal¬
ity. Thus this movement was not simply “modem”
(a feature of modernity) but also “modernist” (a pro¬
ponent of modernity). Activists described themselves
and their goals by the Arabic terms jadid (new) and
mu'asir (contemporary), the Turkish terms yeni
5. Cemaleddin Efendi, Siyasi Hatiralar, 1908-1913 ( Po¬
litical Memoirs, 1908-1913) (Istanbul, Turkey: Terciiman,
1978), pp. 43-47; M. §iikru Hanioglu, Preparation for a
Revolution: The Young Turks, 1902-1908 (New York: Ox¬
ford University Press, 2001), pp. 489^190,
6. Abdul-Hadi Hairi, Shi'ism and Constitutionalism in
Iran (Leiden, Netherlands: E. J. Brill, 1977), p. 242.
(new) and geng (young), and similar words in other
languages. (By contrast, muda, Malay for young, was
initially a pejorative term applied by opponents to the
modernist Islamic movement.) 7 A second character¬
istic involved the usage of a self-consciously Islamic
discourse. Activists were not simply Muslims but
also wished to preserve and improve Islamic faith in
the modem world. This combination of characteris¬
tics emerged in the first part of the nineteenth cen¬
tury, as several Islamic states adopted European mili¬
tary and technical organization, and various Muslim
travelers to Europe brought back influential tales of
progress and enlightenment. We have picked the date
1840 as a rough marker of the emergence of this form
of discourse.
Modernism distinguished the modernist Islamic
movement from previous Islamic reform movements,
which did not identify their values as modern, and
from contemporaneous competitors such as tradition¬
alists who rejected modem values. Finally, it distin¬
guished the movement from two of its successors,
which supplanted modernist Islam in the middle of
the twentieth century: on one hand secularists who
downplayed the importance of Islam in the modern
world, privileging nationalism, socialism, or other
ideologies; on the other hand religious revivalists
who espoused modem values (such as social equal¬
ity, codified law, and mass education) but down¬
played their modernity, privileging authenticity and
divine mandates. Following one classic study, we
have dated the moment of decline at roughly 1940, 8
though modernist Islam continued to spread in sev¬
eral regions after this date. Late in the twentieth cen¬
tury, the combination of modernist and Islamic dis¬
courses was revived in a subset of modernist Islam
that I have labeled “liberal Islam,” which sought to
resuscitate the reputation and accomplishments of
earlier modernists. 9
The boundaries of the modernist Islamic move¬
ment could be imprecise, but its core was clear: a set
7. William R. Roff, The Origins of Malay Nationalism,
2d ed. (Kuala Lumpur. Malaysia: Oxford University Press,
1994), p. 67.
8. Albert Hourani. Arabic Thought in the Liberal Age,
1798-1939 (London: Oxford University Press, 1962), chap¬
ter 13.
9. Charles Kurzman, ed., Liberal Islam (New York: Ox¬
ford University Press, 1998). Several authors are omitted from
the present book because their work was included in this ear¬
lier anthology.
THE MODERNIST ISLAMIC MOVEMENT 5
of key figures who served as lodestones for Mus¬
lim intellectuals of the late nineteenth and twentieth
centuries. Three figures in particular were famed
throughout the Islamic world: Sayyid Jamal al-Din
al-Afghani (Iran, 1838-1897; chapter 11), his student
and collaborator ‘Abduh, and ‘Abduh’s student and
collaborator Muhammad Rashid Rida (Syria-Egypt,
1865-1935; chapter 6), plus regional pioneers Sayyid
Ahmad Khan (North India, 1817-1898; chapter 40),
Namik Kemal (Turkey, 1840-1888; chapter 17), and
Ismail Bey Gasprinskii (Crimea, 1851-1914; chap¬
ter 29). Supporters cited and debated the statements
of these figures, especially the periodicals they ed¬
ited: Afghani and ‘Abduh’s al-‘Urwa al-Wuthqa
(The Strongest Link), published in Paris, 1884; Rida’s
al-Manar (The Beacon), published in Cairo, 1898—
1935; Sayyid Ahmad Khan’s Tahdhib al-Akhlaq
{Refinement of Morals), published in Aligarh, 1870-
1896; Namik Kemal’s Hiirriyet {Liberty) and ibret
{Warning), published in Paris and Istanbul, 1868-
1873; and Gasprinskii’s Terciiman/Perevodchik {The
Interpreter), published in Bakhchisaray, Crimea,
1883-1914. Even authors who disagreed with the
modernist Islamic project located themselves in re¬
lation to these central figures.
The present anthology includes influential writ¬
ings by these authors. Yet the modernist Islamic
movement was not limited to central figures, and this
anthology seeks also to highlight the contributions
of authors from around the Islamic world who were
influential in their regional contexts, from South
Africa to East Europe to Southeast Asia, 10 but not so
well known to other Muslims or scholars of Islam.
The anthology also samples the modernists’ varied
forms of discourse: journalistic essays, scholarly trea¬
tises, and didactic fiction of various sorts, including
dialogues, stories, plays, and poems. In addition, the
anthology presents a cross section of themes and
positions. The modernist Islamic movement was
never monolithic, and variation, even deep disagree¬
ment, existed on virtually all subjects. Modern val¬
ues included both state-building and limits on state
power; elitism and egalitarianism; discipline and lib¬
erty; Europhilism and anti-imperialism. The modem-
10. The regional classifications are inevitably somewhat
arbitrary, as political control and circuits of training reached
across geographic boundaries. Much of North Africa, for
example, was part of the Ottoman Empire, but it is grouped
here with the rest of Africa to provide cross-regional balance.
ists’ Islamic faith encompassed both mysticism and
abhorrence of mysticism; strategic use of traditional
scholarship and rejection of traditional scholarship;
return to a pristine early Islam and updating of early
practices in keeping with historical change.
Considerations of influence and diversity guided
the selection of authors and works in this anthology.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank my
colleagues who served as section editors and project
advisers, applying their expertise to the selection of
succinct, important, relevant, and characteristic con¬
tributions from the authors they have chosen. Inevi¬
tably, the anthology omits certain important figures
for lack of space, and some decisions may be con¬
troversial. The Islamic faith of a couple of authors
(to be discussed in a moment) may be in question—
indeed, opponents charged that ‘Abduh and other
leading modernists were “irreligious” and even “sa-
tanic.” 11 The modernism of some authors may be
criticized—indeed, modernists criticized one another
for going too far, or not far enough, in one direction
or another. This is to be expected of any intellec¬
tual movement. Readers should note that the editors
do not wish to construct a “canon” of modernist
Islam but rather to make available in a single volume
a representative sampling of major voices in the
movement.
What can we learn from these voices? The follow¬
ing sections explore four issues that emerge from the
writings of the modernist Islamic movement, each
organized around the freedom of speech. I propose
that this was the central intellectual issue of the move¬
ment; the right to say novel things in an Islamic dis¬
course. In order to defend modem values, modern¬
ists had to defend the right to defend modem values.
This they did by referring to the particular challenges
and opportunities posed by the onslaught of moder¬
nity; by arguing that their own, often nontraditional
educations qualified them to speak on Islamic issues;
by pioneering new forms of discourse; and, finally,
by laying out their modernist vision of Islam. These
11. Amal Ghazali, “Sufism, Ijtihad, and Modernity: Yusuf
al-Nabhani in the Age of ‘Abd al-Hamid II,” paper presented
at the Middle East Studies Association, Chicago. Ill., 1998,
pp. 19-20; Yahya Abdoulline, "Histoire et interpretations
contemporaines du second reformisme musulman (ou djadi-
disme)” (Contemporary History and Interpretations of the
Second Muslim Reformism, or ladidism), Cahiers du mcmde
russe (Annals of the Russian World), volume 37, numbers 1-
2, 1996, p. 71.
6 Introduction
problematics remain vivid today for Muslims who
wish to espouse modern values in an Islamic dis¬
course.
Why Speak Now?
Modernism is hardly the first movement in Islamic
history to claim a dire need for reform and revival of
the faith. Such calls could be heard already in the
eighth and ninth centuries, 12 and revivalist move¬
ments recurred up through the eighteenth century, a
period whose revivalist activity “created an under¬
lying theme for the modern Islamic experience.” 13
Some modernists called upon this and other prece¬
dents of reform, in part, it appears, to demonstrate
their continuity with Islamic tradition. Rida (chap¬
ter 6), among others, cited the hadith (saying of the
Prophet): “God sends to this nation at the beginning
of every century someone who renews its religion.”
Yet the modernists faced a challenge that earlier
reformers had not, namely the onslaught of moder¬
nity. Modernity was not a disembodied set of ideals;
it was associated, rather, with the imperialist expan¬
sion of Christian Europe, which threatened Islam in
at least five registers.
Militarily, modern means of warfare allowed
Europe to conquer vast regions of the Islamic world.
This trend had begun in the seventeenth century but
gained such momentum by the nineteenth century
that modernist Muslims worried about the prospect
of complete subjugation. “Like a convict, the Mus¬
lim world remains everywhere under someone else’s
control,” wrote Musa Jarullah Bigi (Tatarstan, 1875—
1949; chapter 35). Even the Ottoman Empire, the
most powerful Islamic state, had lost territory and
submitted to treaties allowing foreign intervention in
the empire’s domestic affairs. Namik Kemal (chap¬
ter 17), for example, argued that “the [Ottoman] na¬
tion is faced with the threat of extinction,” and the
Ottoman “state will undoubtedly sink” if current
12. Fazlur Rahman, “Revival and Reform in Islam,” in
P. M. Holt et al., eds., The Cambridge History of Islam (Cam¬
bridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1970), vol¬
ume 2, p. 633; John Obert Voll, “Renewal and Reform in Is¬
lamic History,” in John L. Esposito, ed., Voices of Resurgent
Islam (New York: Oxford University Press, 1983), p. 36.
13. John Obert Voll, Islam: Continuity and Change in the
Modern World , 2d ed. (Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse University
Press, 1994), p. 30.
trends continued. He used this dire prediction to jus¬
tify his call for democratic reform: “every intelligent
person realizes that as long as this tyrannical admin¬
istration prevails in the state, foreign interventions
cannot be stopped.”
Economically, modernity appeared to generate
wealth and commodities that the Islamic world
lacked and desired. Muslim visitors to Europe in the
early and mid-nineteenth century marveled at the gas
street lamps and other indicators of prosperity. 14
Modernist Muslims attributed this prosperity both to
European increases in productivity and to exploita¬
tion of other regions, including Islamic homelands.
A combination of resentment and respect is ex¬
pressed, for example, by Mahmud Tarzi (Afghani¬
stan, 1865-1933; chapter 14): “European states, by
contrast, not only exploit their own mines, but also
those of the entire world. In addition to natural re¬
sources, they are also capable of industrial produc¬
tion. This is simply because they have the knowledge
and we do not.”
Cognitively, modern science challenged other
worldviews with its dramatic claims of success.
Modernist Muslims accepted these claims. Some
emphasized the medieval Islamic roots of modern
science, while others emphasized the seemingly mi¬
raculous advances made in recent years. All, how¬
ever, recognized science as a challenge to Islamic
understandings of the world. Ahmad Khan (chap¬
ter 40), for example, identified this threat even as he
embraced modem scientific disciplines: “I am cer¬
tain that as these sciences spread—and their spread¬
ing is inevitable and I myself after all, too, help and
contribute towards spreading them—there will arise
in the hearts of people an uneasiness and careless¬
ness and even a positive disaffection towards Islam
as it has been shaped in our time.” According to
Ahmad Khan, this threat required Muslims to wipe
the “black stains” of traditionalism from “the origi¬
nal luminous face of Islam.”
Politically, modem institutions of government
seemed, according to their proponents, to maintain
social peace and build national unity in ways that con¬
temporary Islamic states could not. According to
Khayr al-Din (Tunisia, 1822-1890; chapter 2), Euro¬
pean “progress in the governance of mankind, which
14. NazikSabaYared, Arab TravellersandWestem Civi¬
lization, trans. Sumayya Damluji Shahbandar (London: Saqi
Books, 1996).
THE MODERNIST ISLAMIC MOVEMENT 7
has led to the utmost point of prosperity for their coun¬
tries,” relied primarily on respect for personal and
political rights, which he identified as “the basis of the
great development of knowledge and civilization in
the European kingdoms.” Rida wrote in 1907, “The
greatest benefit that the peoples of the Orient have
derived from the Europeans was to learn how real
government ought to be, as well as the assimilation of
this knowledge.” Muslims could not have developed
this independently, he continued. "Had you not re¬
flected upon the state of these people [Europeans],
you, or others like you, would not have considered this
to be part of Islam.” 15 Ayatullah Muhammad Taba-
taba’ i (Iran, 1843-1921) noted in a speech to the newly
founded Iranian parliament: “I’ve never seen the con¬
stitutional countries myself. But I’ve heard, and those
who have seen the constitutional countries have told
me, that the constitution is the cause of the security
and flourishing of the country.” 16
Culturally, modernity introduced novel patterns
of behavior that threatened to displace existing prac¬
tices. Shaykh al-Amin bin ‘Ali al-Mazrui (Kenya,
1890-1947; chapter 7) worried that “every day we
see ourselves mimicking whites, and not only in ways
that are good and which do not contradict our reli¬
gion.” Muslims adopted alcohol and European garb,
but not “their good customs, like their pastimes, their
ways of [conducting] meetings, their love of coun¬
try, their solidarity, and other things like these.”
Muslim women cut their hair in European styles but
ought rather to value “the knowledge European
women have in fixing up their houses and making
them comfortable and neat, and rearing their children
in a healthy way, and with good customs and man¬
ners, and the ability they have in [doing] handy work
and crafts and cooking.”
In sum, the challenges of modernity appeared to
threaten the very existence of Islam. In the context
of social Darwinist competition, many Muslims
worried that Islam would not be able to compete.
Khwaja Altaf Hussein Hali (N orth India, 1837-1914;
chapter 38) worried that the “dilapidated hall of the
true religion, whose pillars have been tottering for
15. Youssef M. Choueiri, Islamic Fundamentalism , rev.
ed. (London: Pinter, 1997), p. 46.
16. Fereydun Adamiyat, Fikr-i dimukrasi-i ijtima'i dar
nahzat-i mashrutiyat-i Iran (Social Democratic Thought in
the Iranian Constitutionalist Movement ) (Tehran, Iran:
Intisharat-i Payam, 1975), p. 4.
ages, .. . will remain in the world only a few days
more.” ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Kawakibi (Syria, 1854—
1902; chapter 19) feared that “danger has come
close—may God forbid it—to the heart.” A poem
published in Iran and Afghanistan suggested that
“The black smoke rising from the roof of the father-
land / Is caused by us. / The flames that devour us
from left and right / Are caused by us.” 17
Yet these challenges also provided an opportu¬
nity, according to modernist Muslims. By realizing
modem ideals, in this view, Islamic societies could
not only survive but thrive, as well as recover the
original ideals of their faith. “All new things are
hardly blameworthy. On the contrary, most innova¬
tions are praiseworthy,” wrote Rifa‘a Rafi‘ al-
Tahtawi (Egypt, 1801-1873; chapter l). 18 Accord¬
ing to §emseddin Sami Frasheri (Albania-Turkey,
1850-1904; chapter 18), “It is a regrettable circum¬
stance that, because today civilization seems to be¬
long exclusively to the Christian nations, ignorant
masses of our own nation take it to be a symbol or
requisite of Christianity, and thus deem distancing
themselves from it and guarding themselves against
it to be a religious duty. We can affirm that it is not
the religion of Islam which prevents Muslim nations
from becoming civilized.”
Even colonial dependence had positive implica¬
tions, some modernists argued. Muhammad Iqbal
(North India, 1877-1938; chapter 41), later an
apostle of Pakistani independence, argued that the
British Empire was “a civilizing factor” in the Islamic
world: “England, in fact, is doing one of our own
great duties, which unfavorable circumstances did
not permit us to perform. It is not the number of
Muhammadans which it protects, but the spirit of the
British Empire that makes it the greatest Muham¬
madan Empire in the world.” Thomas Ismael Urbain
(France, 1812-1884), a convert to Islam who infuri¬
ated French colonizers of North Africa with his criti¬
cism of their brutality, nonetheless defended the
potential of colonization to develop “an administra¬
tive organization favorable to the development of
17. Vartan Gregorian, The Emergence of Modem Af¬
ghanistan: Politics of Reform and Modernization, 1880-1946
(Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1969), p. 167.
18. Gilbert Delanoue. Moralistes et politiques musul-
mans dans I’Egypte du XIXe siecle ( 1798-1882 ) (Muslim
Moralists and Politicians in Egypt of the 19th Century, 1798-
1882) (Cairo, Egypt: Institut franfais d'areheologie orientale
du Caire, 1982), volume 2. p. 450.
8 Introduction
agriculture and commerce ... an organization of re¬
ligion and of justice, a large system of public educa¬
tion, and finally various philanthropic institutions.” 19
Sayid Syekh al-Hadi (Malaya, 1867-1934), one of
the founders of the Singapore reformist journal al-
Imam (chapter 46), went so far as to praise British
colonizers as God’s “righteous servants.” 20
Not all modernists fawned so enthusiastically over
European civilization. Some distinguished between
aspects worthy of adoption and those to be rejected.
Rida, for example, concluded that “all that we need
to acquire from Europe is its scientific achievements,
technical skill and advanced industries. The acqui¬
sition of these aspects does not require all this amount
of Westernization.” 21 Others, such as Ali Suavi (Tur¬
key, 1839-1878; chapter 16), noted the hypocrisy of
European ideals in the age of imperialism: “Just look
how those Frenchmen talk pretentiously about free¬
dom and equality, all the while seeking world domi¬
nation like Caesar.” AbuT-Kalam Azad (Bengal-
India, 1888-1958; chapter 44) was bitingly critical
of the “inequity” of British colonialism, which “can¬
not possibly countenance any nationalistic awaken¬
ing or agitation for progress, reform, or justice ...
as such agitation would spell the inevitable down¬
fall of its dominant power.” Hadji Agus Salim
(Sumatra-Java, 1884—1954; chapter 49) questioned
whether the Dutch colonial government was “exer¬
cising its power in accordance with the spirit of the
times, that is, taking on the responsibility for prepar¬
ing these people to develop their own independent
talents, so that Indonesians can have their own inde¬
pendent country?” ‘Abd al-‘Aziz al-Tha‘alibi (Tuni¬
sia, 1879-1944) compared the freedom of the French
press with French colonial decrees limiting the Tu¬
nisian press and “prohibiting the entry into Tunisia
of newspapers and writings published in France and
elsewhere.” 22 Yet these critics embraced the ideals
19. Charles-Robert Ageron, Les Algdriens musulmans et
la France (1871-1919) (Muslim Algerians and France,
1871-1919) (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1968),
volume 1, p. 404.
20. Ibrahim bin Abu Bakar, Islamic Modernism in Ma¬
laya: The Life and Thought of Sayid Syekh al-Hadi, 1867-
1934 (Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: University of Malaya Press,
1994), pp. 159-160.
21. Emad Eldin Shahin, Through Muslim Eyes: M.
Rashid Rida and the West (Herndon, Va.: International In¬
stitute of Islamic Thought, 1993), p. 49.
22. Abdelaziz Thaalbi, La Tunisie martyre (Tunisia the
of modernity, even as they berated Europeans for fail¬
ing to live up to these ideals.
Some modernists seemed, frankly, conflicted
about European civilization. Iqbal (chapter 41),
quoted above praising colonialism’s “civilizing”
mission in 1909, warned Muslims against modernity
a few years later:
But do not seek the glow of Love from the
knowledge of to-day,
Do not seek the nature of Truth from this
infidel’s cup!
Long have I been running to and fro,
Learning the secrets of the New Knowledge:
Its gardeners have put me to the trial
And have made me intimate with their roses.
Roses! Tulips, rather, that warn one not to
smell them—
Like paper roses, a mirage of perfume.
Since this garden ceased to enthral me
I have nested on the Paradisal tree.
Modem knowledge is the greatest blind—
Idol-worshipping, idol-selling, idol-making! 23
Later in life, Iqbal offered similarly antagonistic
opinions. On one hand, for example, he praised Tur¬
key for its drastic Westernizing reforms: “The truth
is that among the Muslim nations of today, Turkey
alone has shaken off its dogmatic slumber, and at¬
tained self-consciousness. She alone has claimed her
right of intellectual freedom; she alone has passed
from the ideal to the real—a transition which entails
keen intellectual and moral struggle.” 24 On the other
hand, he castigated Turkey for Westernizing:
The Turk, tom from the self,
Enravished by the West, drinks from her hand
A poison sweet; and since the antidote
He has renounced, what can I say except
God save him. 25
Martyr) (Beirut, Lebanon: Dar al-Gharb al-Islami, 1985),
p. 29. First published in 1920.
23. The Secrets of the Self(Asrar-i khudi), trans. Reynold
A. Nicholson (Lahore, Pakistan: Shaikh Muhammad Ashraf.
1950), pp. 76-77. First published in 1915.
24. Muhammad Iqbal, The Reconstruction of Religious
Thought in Islam (Oxford, England: Oxford University Press,
1930), p. 162; also in Kurzman, ed., Liberal Islam, p. 262.
25. Pilgrimage of Eternity (Javidnatnah), trans. Shaikh
Mahmud Ahmad (Lahore, Pakistan: Institute of Islamic Cul¬
ture, 1961). p. 167. First published in 1932.
THE MODERNIST ISLAMIC MOVEMENT 9
Iqbal’s Persian and Urdu poetry 1 denouncing mo¬
dernity may be at odds with his English-language
prose embracing modernity. But this tension repre¬
sents the challenge of the modernist Islamic move¬
ment as a whole. Modernity involved both threat and
opportunity, external imposition and internal reno¬
vation. Modernists argued that the crisis demanded
drastic reform in the Islamic world.
Who Can Speak?
Logically prior to the substance of their arguments,
the modernists had to defend their right to make
such arguments. They did so by challenging two
forms of scholarly authority that stood in their way:
the authority of the past and the authority of the
credential.
The authority of the past crystallized in the prac¬
tice of taqlid, a term that literally meant to follow
established scholars but which modernists ritually
denigrated as blind, irrational imitation of tradition. 26
All of the lodestone figures in the modernist move¬
ment weighed in on this theme, 27 as did others: “It is
better to follow a beast than an imitator,” wrote ‘ Abd
al-Qadir al-Jaza’iri (Algeria-Syria, circa 1807-1883;
chapter 15). “ Taqlid and Islam are mutually contra¬
dictory,” wrote Abdullah Bubi (Tatarstan, 1871-
1922; chapter 32). “ Taqlid of religious leaders who
pretend to present true religion is no different from
obedience to political tyrants. Either one is a form
of idolatry,” wrote Muhammad Husayn Na'ini (Iran,
1860-1936; chapter 13).
Rather than follow precedent, the modernists ar¬
gued that active reinterpretation of Islamic sources
was permitted and even necessary under certain cir¬
cumstances. Some cited revelation and precedent
from the early Islamic era in support of this position.
Jamal al-Din al-Qasimi (Syria, 1866-1914; chap¬
ter 23)—among many others—quoted a hadith in
which Muhammad sent a companion, Mu'adh ibn
Jabal (died 627), to serve as governor of Yemen:
“The Prophet said to him, ‘How would you act as
judge?’ He said, ‘I would judge by God’s book.’ The
26. N. Calder, “Taklid,” in P. J. Bearman et al., eds., En¬
cyclopedia of Islam, 2d ed. (Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 2000),
volume 10, pp. 137-138.
27. Kurzman. Liberal Islam, p. 8.
Prophet then said, ‘And if you do not find a ruling in
God’s book?’ He said, ‘By the sunna [precedent] of
God’s Messenger.’ The Prophet then said, ‘And if
you do not find it there?’ He said, ‘I would perform
ijtihad [rational interpretation] and spare no effort,’
and he struck his chest. Muhammad said, ‘Praise God
to give success to the messenger of the Messenger
of God, as he has pleased the Messenger of God.’”
The concept of ijtihad, derived from a root mean¬
ing “effort” or “struggle,” had for centuries been lim¬
ited to a fairly technical meaning, referring to the
intellectual effort of trained Islamic scholars to ar¬
rive at legal rulings on matters not covered in the
sacred sources. 28 The modernists latched on to the
term and broadened its scope to include three distinct
usages. 29 First was the right to reach across the sev¬
eral legal schools ( madhhabs ) in which scholars tra¬
ditionally limited themselves, and draw arguments
from any and all of them—Mahmud Shukri al-Alusi
(Iraq, 1857-1924; chapter 20) called it “outlandish”
to “state that one is obliged to follow the madhhab
of a particular scholar, and even more outlandish is
the opinion of those who state that one is obliged to
adopt one of the four madhhabs Second was the
right to bypass the madhhabs and reach back directly
to the sacred sources, namely the Qur’an and the
precedent of the Prophet and his Companions—to
“put the Qur’an in its rightful place,” in the words of
Muhammad Akram Khan (Bengal-Pakistan, 1868—
1968; chapter 45). Third was the effort to reconcile
the sacred sources with human reason, to contend that
“Islam is a religion that is compatible with reason;
that is, it has no principles that contradict reason,”
as stated by Muhammad Abdul Khader Maulavi
(Malabar, 1873-1932; chapter 42).
This widened door of ijtihad should not have been
shut in the early centuries of Islam, modernists con¬
tended. Syekh Ahmad Surkati (Sudan-Java, 1872—
1943; chapter 48) wrote that taqlid was not only
contrary to reason and revelation, but also “contrary
to the instructions of the imams [founders of the four
main Sunni schools of law] whom those practicing
28. J. Schacht, “Idjtihad,'' in Bernard Lewis et al., eds..
Encyclopedia of Islam, 2d ed. (Leiden, Netherlands: E. J.
Brill: London: Luzac, 1971), volume 3, pp. 1026-1027,
29. Muneer Goolam Fareed, Legal Reform in the Muslim
World: The Anatomy of a Scholarly Dispute in the 19th and
the Early 20th Centuries on the Usage of Ijtihad as a Legal
Tool (San Francisco, Calif.: Austin & Winfield. 1996), p. 9.
10 Introduction
taqlid claim to be imitating.” Rizaeddin bin
Fakhreddin (Tatarstan, 1858-1936; chapter 33) made
a parallel argument about Muslims’ veneration of
saintly figures, who “would not have approved of
such lies and the extravagant praise and miracles at¬
tributed to them.” Indeed, some modernists suggested
that the door of ijtihad had never been shut com¬
pletely, as scholars—even scholars espousing
taqlid —were forced by changed circumstance to
devise novel approaches. 30 Musa Kaztm (Turkey,
1858-1920; chapter 22) wrote that “all of the ‘ulama'
[religious scholars] in every era wrote books in ac¬
cordance with the needs of the day.... We have the
same need. We must also reform the theological
books in accordance with the needs of our era.” In
a more critical tone, Ahmad Hassan (Singapore-
Indonesia, 1888-1958; chapter 50) accused support¬
ers of taqlid of adopting the practice only when it
suited them: “When these traditionalist religious
scholars agree with the actions and words of the
Prophet, they go directly to the hadith as the source
of this agreement. But if they disagree, then they go
to their earlier scholars”—that is, they engage in
taqlid —“on the basis that they themselves are not
‘original’ scholars and may not use hadith directly.”
Modernists saw taqlid not as a religious require¬
ment but as an instrument of institutional authority
designed to suppress challenging views. 31 Indeed,
the modernists’ polemical denunciation of tradi¬
tional Islamic thought may have been aimed more
at the authority of conservative scholars than at their
actual writings, most of which did not conform to
the modernists’ caricature. Modernists in Dam¬
ascus, for example, were repeatedly accused by
conservatives and interrogated by Ottoman authori¬
ties on charges of espousing ijtihad, 32 and modern¬
ists in Central Asia had to tiptoe around the issue
30. Recent scholarship has confirmed this view—see
Wael B. Hallaq, A History of Islamic Legal Theories (Cam¬
bridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1997),
pp. 117-124.
31. Recent scholarship suggests that the original purpose
of taqlid was enforcement of conformity, or in more flatter¬
ing terms, the building of legal uniformity and predictabil¬
ity—see Mohammad Fadel, “The Social Logic of Taqlid and
the Rise of the Mukhtasar ,” Islamic Law and Society, vol¬
ume 3, number 2, 1996, pp. 193-233.
32. David Dean Commins, Islamic Reform: Politics and
Social Change in Late Ottoman Syria (New York: Oxford
University Press, 1990), pp. 51-52, 55-59, 62-63, 114.
to avoid trouble. 33 The theme of authority arises
time and again in the modernists’ works, especially
the analogy between religious authority and politi¬
cal authority. Na‘ini, quoted above, likened taqlid
to political tyranny, and both to idolatry. “Islam
delivered man from the slavery of priests. It recog¬
nized no intermediary between the Creator and the
created,” wrote Mirza Riza Quli Shari‘at-Sangalaji
(Iran, 1890-1944). 34 Bubi (chapter 32) called con¬
servative thought “useful only to oppressive rulers
and sultans.” The Algerian reformist newspaper al-
Muntaqid (The Critic), edited by ‘Abd al-Hamid Ibn
Badis (Algeria, 1889-1940; chapter 9), directed its
opening editorial against the combined tyranny of
political and religious authorities who sought “to
rule [the community’s] political, economic, intel¬
lectual, and religious affairs.” 35
Modernists proposed that contemporary scholars
are just as qualified as their predecessors to engage
in ijtihad. “Do not later men study, compose, and see
things like earlier men?” Qasimi asked, quoting a
tenth century scholar (chapter 23): “If people were
limited to the books of the ancients, then a great deal
of knowledge would be lost, penetrating minds
would go astray, articulate tongues would be blunted,
and we would hear nothing but repetition.” Even the
Prophet’s understanding of Islam, according to
Khwaja Ahmad Din Amritsari (North India, 1861—
1936) of the Ahl-i-Qur’an movement, was not nec¬
essarily superior to that of other Muslims. 36 Or per¬
haps, if one believes in progress, later scholars are
more qualified than earlier ones, a theme broached
by Bubi (chapter 32): “Since God’s creation is pro¬
gressing day by day, therefore the latest religion,
Islam, is the most perfect religion of all the religions.
Similarly, it is quite possible and in accordance with
33. Ingeborg Baldauf, “Jadidism in Central Asia within
Reformism and Modernism in the Muslim World,” Die Welt
des Islams (The World of Islam), volume 41, number 1, 2001,
p. 77.
34. Yann Richard. “Shari‘at Sangalaji: A Reformist
Theologian of the Rida Shah Period,” in Said Amir Arjomand,
ed., Authority and Political Culture in Shi'ism (Albany: State
University of New York Press, 1988), p. 172.
35. Ali Merad, Le reformisme musulman en Algerie de
1925 a 1940 (Muslim Reformism in Algeria from 1925 to
1940) (Paris: Mouton & Co.. 1967), pp. 445^146.
36. Daniel W. Brown, Rethinking Tradition in Modern
Islamic Thought (Cambridge, England: Cambridge Univer¬
sity Press, 1996), p. 68.
THE MODERNIST ISLAMIC MOVEMENT
God's sunna that in our time there might be scholars
of the same degree as, or better than, the scholars of
the past.”
Even if they overcame the hurdle of taqlid , mod¬
ernists faced a second hurdle: many of them lacked
the seminary credentials historically required of re¬
ligious scholars. Educational pioneer Nabawiyah
Musa (Egypt, 1886-1951), a teenager prevented by
her family from attending school, taught herself to
read, memorized the Qur’an, and sought to interpret
its verses. A male relative studying at the al-Azhar
mosque in Cairo objected to this act as “heretical,”
and said that even he would not proceed without a
mentor. 37 Modernists combated their handicap by
arguing that credentialed scholars ought not to mo¬
nopolize religious interpretation. Several modernists
argued, along with al-Jaza’iri (chapter 15), that “the
intelligent person must consider the statement rather
than the person who is stating it.” For Azad, the
Qur’anic verse, “Do they not consider the Qur’an?”
(Sura 4, Verse 82), legitimated widespread interpre¬
tation, since the verse did not limit “they” to a small
group. 38 Further, some modernists suggested that all
Muslims had a duty to engage in ijtihad. Khayr al-
Din (chapter 2) and Na'ini (chapter 13)—Sunni and
Shi’i, respectively—both cite the precedent of the
second caliph, ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab (634-644), who
invited all Muslims to judge the propriety of his ac¬
tions. In Khayr al-Din’s telling, ‘Umar told the Mus¬
lims, “O people, let him among you who sees any
deviation in me set it right.” A man stood up and said,
“By God, if we saw in you deviation we would rec¬
tify it with our swords.” ‘Umar replied, “Praise God
who created in this umma him who would rectify with
his sword my deviations.” In these precedents, the
independent religious judgment of noncredentialed
Muslims was deemed praiseworthy.
Some modernists went further and argued that
traditional educations had become so sterile and
scholastic that they actively disqualified their gradu¬
ates from meaningful intellectual work, leaving the
field open to the modem-educated. Afghani (chap-
37. Margot Badran, Feminists, Islam, and Nation: Gen¬
der and the Making of Modern Egypt (Princeton, N.J.:
Princeton University Press, 1995), p. 40.
38. J. M. S. Baljon, Modem Muslim Koran Interpreta¬
tion (1880-1960) (Leiden, Netherlands: E. J. Brill, 1961),
p. 16; also Ian Henderson Douglas, Abul Kalam Azad (Delhi,
India: Oxford University Press, 1988), pp. 127, 198-199.
ter 11) likened traditional scholarship to “a very nar¬
row wick, on top of which is a very small flame that
neither lights its surroundings nor gives light to oth¬
ers.” Bigi (chapter 35) blamed seminaries for the
“widespread stoppage of brains that caused the mind
of the Muslim world to remain lifeless and motion¬
less, and therefore to decline.” The Singapore news¬
paper al-Imam (chapter 46) excoriated traditional
teachers who assigned rote exercises “in order to take
up time, lazily believing that [education is like watch¬
ing] plants grow.” The Azerbaijan newspaper Kaspii
{The Caspian) wrote that traditional schools “do not
deserve to be called schools.” 39
Education in secular subjects, by contrast, would
prepare students properly for the practice and study
of Islam. Abdurrauf Fitrat (Bukhara, 1886-1938;
chapter 34) made the analogy with trains and steam¬
ships, invented by “infidels” but resulting in in¬
creased pilgrimages by Muslims: “The question of
studying is just the same. Under the old system,
women are deprived of learning and most of the men
live in illiteracy, and in every generation one or
two great scholars appear. Under the new system,
because it is easier, both women and men will be¬
come learned.” The Young Ansar-Ud-Deen Society,
founded in Nigeria in 1923, established a series of
Western-style schools, arguing, in the words of one
its founders, that “by this means alone ... can Islam
be better studied and understood.” 40
This critique emerged from within the seminar¬
ies themselves, pioneered by traditionally trained
reformists—not necessarily full-fledged modern¬
ists—who admired aspects of modern education.
They sought to reform the seminaries by incor¬
porating modem discipline—for example, examina¬
tions, grades, and prizes at the Deoband seminary in
India 41 —and modem disciplines. “A major reason for
the decline in the ‘ulama "s influence in the country,”
wrote a founder of the Nadwat al-‘Ulama’ seminary
in India, “is the popular perception that they have
39. Tadeusz Swietochowski, Russian Azerbaijan, 1905-
1920 (Cambridge. England: Cambridge University Press,
1985), p. 30.
40. Stefan Reichmuth. “Education and the Growth of Re¬
ligious Associations Among Yoruba Muslims: The Ansar-Ud-
Deen Society of Nigeria,” Journal of Religion in Africa, vol¬
ume 26. number 4, 1996, p. 373.
41. Barbara Metcalf, Islamic Revival in British India:
Deoband, 1860-1900 (Princeton. N.J.: Princeton University
Press, 1982), pp. 104-105.
2 Introduction
withdrawn into their cells and know nothing about
the state of the world, so that in worldly matters their
guidance is entirely unworthy of attention.” 42
Even when they failed in their attempts at insti¬
tutional reform, leading internal critics served as
role models for cadres of modernists. In Bukhara,
Shihabuddin Marjani (Tatarstan, 1818-1889) in¬
spired a generation of seminary-trained modernists
who considered him comparable to Protestant Ref¬
ormation leader Martin Luther. 43 At al-Azhar in
Cairo, ‘Abduh achieved little reform 44 —though as
the chief religious official of Egypt he helped to in¬
corporate al-Azhar graduates into a state-run judi¬
cial hierarchy. 45 Nonetheless, ‘Abduh’s plans for al-
Azhar fired the imagination of dozens of young
religious scholars who came to study with him, even
for brief periods. One such student, Dzemaluddin
Causevic (Bosnia, 1870-1938; chapter 26), returned
to the Balkans as a convinced modernist and called
‘Abduh “Respected Teacher” for the rest of his ca¬
reer; another returned to China dedicated to “im¬
proved methods” of education. 46 A Tatar seminary
in Crimea, attempting comparable reforms, sent a
leading student to study at al-Azhar. 47 ‘Abduh even
inspired Shi‘i modernists who never studied in
Cairo, such as Shaykh Asadullah Mamaqani (Iran,
early twentieth century) and Muhammad Rida al-
Muzaffar (Iraq, bom 1904), who proposed that Shi‘i
seminaries be reformed on the model of ‘Abduh’s
plans for al-Azhar; 48 and Muhsin Sharara (Lebanon-
42. Muhammad Qasim Zaman, “Religious Education and
the Rhetoric of Reform: The Madrasa in British India and
Pakistan,” Comparative Studies in Society and History , vol¬
ume 41, number 2, 1999, p. 306.
43. Ahmet Kanhdere, Reform within Islam: The Tajdid
and Jadid Movements among the Kazan Tatars ( 1809-1917)
(Istanbul, Turkey: Eren Yayincihk, 1997), p. 59.
44. A. Chris Eccel, Egypt, Islam, and Social Change: al-
Azhar in Conflict and Accommodation (Berlin, West Ger¬
many: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 1984), pp. 176-189.
45. Amira El-Azhary Sonbol, The New Mamluks: Egyp¬
tian Society and Modem Feudalism (Syracuse, N.Y.: Syra¬
cuse University Press, 2000), pp. 70-71.
46. Marshall Broomhall, Islam in China (London: Mor¬
gan and Scott, 1910), pp. 266-268.
47. Hakan Kirimli, National Movements and National
Identity among the Crimean Tatars ( 1905-1916 ) (Leiden,
Netherlands: E. J. Brill, 1996), p. 51.
48. Said Amir Arjomand, “Ideological Revolution in
Shiism,” in Arjomand, ed.. Authority and Political Culture
in Shi'ism (Albany: State University of New York Press,
Iraq, 1901-1946), who called in 1928 for the com¬
ing of a “a Shiite Muhammad ‘Abduh.” 49
Some seminarians despaired of reforming the
seminaries. Munawwar Qari (Turkistan-Uzbekistan,
1878-1931; chapter 30)—trained at the traditional
schools of Bukhara—condemned such institutions
for limiting themselves to commentaries on commen¬
taries. “Our present schools take four or five years
to teach only reading and writing, and our colleges
take 15 to 20 years to study introductions [to canoni¬
cal texts] and the four readings. To hope for them to
impart a knowledge of the sciences of the present age
is as futile as to expect one to reach out to a bird fly¬
ing in the sky while standing in a well.” Qari founded
the first usul-i jadid (new principles) school in Tash¬
kent, combining religious and secular coursework.
Similar schools emerged throughout the Islamic
world, producing graduates who often considered
themselves legitimate competitors with seminarians
for religious knowledge.
One strain of Islamic modernism went so far in
its devaluation of traditional scholarship that its pro¬
ponents viewed religious training merely as a cover
for modem values, without any particular merit in its
own right. Mirza Malkum Khan (Iran, 1833-1908;
chapter 12), for example, considered his French sec¬
ondary education as qualifying him to guide the Ira¬
nian nation toward “civilization.” He told a British
audience of his strategic approach to Islamic educa¬
tion: “ideas which were by no means accepted when
coming from your agents in Europe, were accepted
with great delight when it was proved that they were
latent in Islam.” 50 Abdullah Cevdet (Turkey, 1869—
1932; chapter 21) made similar comments, 51 as did
Europeans seeking to inculcate modern values in an
1988), p. 183; Yitzhak Nakash, The Shi'is of Iraq (Princeton,
N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1994), pp. 262-268.
49. Sabrina Mervin. “The Clerics of Jabal ‘Amil and the
Reform of Religious Teaching in Najaf Since the Beginning
of the Twentieth Century,” in Rainer Brunner and Werner
Ende, eds., The Twelver Shia in Modem Times (Leiden, Neth¬
erlands: E. J. Brill, 2000), p. 82.
50. Hamid Algar, Mirza Malkum Khan (Berkeley: Uni¬
versity of California Press, 1973), pp. 13-17.
51. M. §ukrii Hanioglu, Bir Siyasal Dusuniir Olarak
Doktor Abdullah Cevdet ve Donemi (Doctor Abdullah
Cevdet: A Political Thinker and His Era ) (Istanbul. Turkey:
U^dal Negriyat, 1981), pp. 325-341.
THE MODERNIST ISLAMIC MOVEMENT
13
Islamic language. 52 This strain shaded into outright
secularists, such as Mirza Fath ‘Ali Akhundzada
(Azerbaijan, 1812-1878), who saw no need for the
pretense of Islamic education and doubted that Islam
could ever be construed as compatible with modem
values. 53
The modernists’ critique of seminary training did
not imply complete democratization of the right to
engage in Islamic reasoning. Despite the precedents
that some modernists cited, urging all Muslims to
make independent religious judgments, the modern¬
ists generally replaced one form of credentialing with
another—just as modernists did outside the Islamic
world as well. Suavi (chapter 16) rejected a defini¬
tion of freedom that permits “saying whatever comes
to one’s mind,” giving the example of a French news¬
paper that denied the existence of God. ‘Abduh
(chapter 3) offered a warning from the early centu¬
ries of Islamic history, when “every opinion-monger
took his stand upon the liberty of thought the Qur’an
enjoined,” leading to dangerous schisms. Ahmad
Khan (chapter 40)—while favoring freedom of
speech on the pragmatic grounds that open debate
advanced the search for truth 54 —was dismissive of
“the opinion or independent judgment of every Tom,
Dick, and Harry,” and sought to justify his position
“not by any traditional argument, nor by any proofs
of the mujtahids based on independent judgment, but
by nature.” Surkati (chapter 48) limited ijtihad only
to “those who have the capacity and opportunity to
understand the proofs of God and His laws.”
52. Gustave Demorgny, Essai de reformes et d'enseigne-
ment administratifs en Perse (Essay on Administrative Re¬
forms and Training in Persia) (Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1915),
p. 7; Christopher Harrison, France and Islam in West Africa,
1860-1960 (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University
Press, 1988), p. 189. Other Europeans considered modernist
Islam a threat to colonial control and sided instead with con¬
servative Muslims—for example, see Guy Imart, Islamic and
Slavic Fundamentalisms: Foes or Allies? The Turkestanian
Reagent (Bloomington: Indiana University, Research Insti¬
tute for Inner Asian Studies, 1987).
53. Mehrdad Kia, “Mirza Fath Ali Akhundzadeh and the
Call for the Modernization of the Islamic World,” Middle
Eastern Studies, volume 31, number 3, 1995, pp. 422^)48.
54. Mansoor Moaddel and Kamran Talattof, eds., Con¬
temporary Debates in Islam: An Anthology of Modernist and
Fundamentalist Thought (New York: St. Martin’s, 2000),
pp. 109-121.
Other modernists limited ijtihad to those who
agreed with them. Tahtawi (chapter 1) supported
religious freedom “on condition that it adheres to the
principles of religion”—meaning the principles that
he emphasized. Rida (chapter 6) supported “freedom
of religion, opinion, speech, writing, dress, and
work,” but not for the “horde of heretics” who en¬
gage in “chatter, sophistry, audacity in mixing right
with wrong, and insolence in criticizing their oppo¬
nents or critics.” Ibn Badis condemned opposing
positions as bid‘a (impermissible innovation), 55 a
charge that was often leveled against the modernists
themselves. Several authors, though not all, contrib¬
uted to the polemic between the Sunni and Shi‘i sects,
considering the other to be disqualified from ijtihad
by their imperfect faith. And competition within the
movement led to other polemics—for example,
Rida’s resentment at Gasprinskii’s leadership of pan-
Islamic conference planning in Cairo, 56 or the
Calcutta-based challenge to Ahmad Khan’s North
Indian leadership of the modernist Islamic movement
in South Asia. 57
In sum, the modernists sought to breach the mo¬
nopoly of traditional religious scholars over Islamic
interpretation, and to limit the relativistic damage of
this breach, through a single maneuver. They ex¬
pressed confidence in their own qualifications—
seminary training, modern education, or personal
virtuosity—as compared both with their scholarly
opponents and the “masses.” Even when these quali¬
fications were asserted in humble terms, they opened
a space for the right to speak, as in Ahmad Khan’s
statement (chapter 40): “I am an ignorant person,
neither a maulavi [religious scholar], nor a mufti [re¬
ligious official], nor a qadi [judge], nor a preacher.
... I do not say that whatever I investigated is true.
But once I had no other choice but to do whatever
55. Ali Merad, Le reformisme musulman en Algerie de
1925 a 1940 (Muslim Reformism in Algeria from 1925 to
1940) (Paris, France: Mouton. 1967), pp. 231-234.
56. Thomas Kuttner, “Russian Jadidism and the Islamic
World: Ismail Gasprinskii in Cairo, 1908,” Cahiers du monde
russe et sovietique (Annals of the Russian and Soviet World),
volume 16, 1975, pp. 383^124; Martin Kramer, Islam As¬
sembled: The Advent of the Muslim Congresses (New York:
Columbia University Press, 1986), pp. 41^15.
57. Ayesha Jalal, Self and Sovereignty: Individual and
Community in South Asian Islam Since 1850 (New York:
Routledge, 2001), pp. 88-90.
14 Introduction
could be done by me, then I had certainly to do ex¬
actly what I did and what I am still doing. God knows
my pure intention.”
How to Speak
The novel approaches of modernist Islam frequently
found expression in novel forms of discourse. The
modernists specified at least three ways in which the
literary forms of the past were inadequate.
First, modernists held that long-standing literary
themes were insufficiently attuned to the concerns of
contemporary Muslims. They sought to replace flow¬
ery language, irrelevant fantasy, and crude humor
with noble and useful themes. Modernist Islamic
poets, for example, adapted traditional poetic forms
throughout the Islamic world. 58 One of the most in¬
fluential exemplars of this adaptation, Hali’s “The
Flow and Ebb of Islam” (chapter 38), adopted the
traditional Urdu structure of the musaddas, with its
particular rhyme scheme and verse length, but filled
the structure with nontraditional content. In an un¬
usually extensive and reflexive introduction to the
poem, Hali explained:
When I beheld the new pattern of the age, my heart
became sick of the old poetry, and I began to feel
ashamed of stringing together empty fabri¬
cations. ... It is true that much has been written, and
continues to be written about this. But no one has
yet written poetry, which makes a natural appeal to
all, and has been bequeathed to the Muslims as a
legacy from the Arabs, for the purpose of awakening
the community. 59
The traditional literary form of debate ( munazara )
was also adopted and infused with modernist con¬
tent, 60 as in Kawakibi’s fictional pan-Islamic assem-
58. Various articles on “Shi'r,” in C. E. Bosworth et al.,
eds.. The Encyclopedia of Islam, 2d ed. (Leiden, Netherlands:
E. J. Brill, 1997), volume 9, pp. 462^170.
59. Khwaja Altaf Hussein Hali, Hali’s Musaddas: The
Flow and Ebb of Islam, trans. Christopher Shackle and Javed
Majeed (Delhi, India: Oxford University Press, 1997), p. 93.
60. E. Wagner, “Munazara,” in C. E. Bosworth et al.,
eds., The Encyclopedia of Islam, 2d ed. (Leiden, Netherlands:
E. J. Brill, 1993), volume 7, pp. 565-568; Jakob Skovgaard-
Petersen, “Portrait of the Intellectual as a Young Man: Rashid
Rida’s Muhawarat al-muslih wa-al-muqallid (1906),” Islam
and Christian-Muslim Relations, volume 12, number 1,2001,
pp. 93-104.
bly (chapter 19) and the startling inversion effected
by Fitrat (chapter 34), in which debate between a
European and a Bukharan Muslim is staged with the
author embodied in the European character. Mod¬
ernists commandeered the travelogue format, main¬
taining the positive comparison of Islam with reli¬
gions of other lands, but also stressing the wonders
of modernity—generally focused on Europe, as in
books by Tahtawi and Mirza Saleh Shirazi (Iran,
circa 1790-1845), but also Iran and India, as de¬
scribed by Siraj al-Din Hakim (Bukhara, 1877—
1914), and Japan, as reported by ‘Ali Ahmad al-
Jarjawi (Egypt, mid-nineteenth-early twentieth
century). 61 Theology ( kalam ), long suspect within
clerical circles for its rationalist heritage, was re¬
vived by Muhammad Shibli Nu'mani (North India,
1857-1914) and Ismail Hakkt Izmirli (Turkey,
1869-1946), among others. 62 Traditional hagio-
graphic literature was transformed into modern bi¬
ography, as in Fakhreddin’s study of the 14th cen¬
tury reformer Ibn Taymiyya, a popular figure among
the modernists, 63 in which—according to the au¬
thor—“every piece of information and fact is exam¬
ined meticulously, and partisanship is avoided as
much as possible” (chapter 33).
A second movement among modernists involved
the development of novel forms of religious writing.
61. Nadia Abu Zahra, “Al-Tahtawi as Translator of the
Culture of Parisian Society,” in Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, ed.,
Transfer of Modem Science & Technology to the Muslim
World (Istanbul, Turkey: Research Centre for Islamic History,
Art, and Culture, 1992), pp. 419^124; Monica Ringer, “The
Quest for the Secret of Strength in Iranian Nineteenth-
Century Travel Literature," in Nikki R. Keddie and Rudi
Matthee, eds., Iran and the Surrounding World (Seattle:
University of Washington Press, 2002), pp. 141-161;
Mohamad Tavakoli-Targhi, Refashioning Iran (Houndsmills,
England: Palgrave, 2001), pp. 35-76; Mirza Siradj ad-Din
Hakim, Souvenirs de voyage pour les gens de Boukhara
(Travel Memoirs for the People of Bukhara), trans. Stephane
Dudoignon (Paris: Actes Sud, 1999); Michael F. Laffan,
“Making Meiji Muslims: The Travelogue of ‘Ali Ahmad al-
Jaijawi,” East Asian History, number 22, 2001, pp. 145-170.
62. Mehr Afroz Murad, Intellectual Modernism of Shibli
Nu'mani (Lahore, Pakistan: Institute of Islamic Culture,
1976), pp. 4-50; Hilmi Ziya Ulken, Lapensee de I’lslam (The
Thought of Islam) (Istanbul. Turkey: Fakiilteler Matbaasi.
1953), pp. 126-127.
63. Henri Laoust, Essai sur les doctrines sociales et
politiques de Taki-d-Din Ahmad b. Taimiya (Essay on the
Social and Political Doctrines of Taqi al-Din Ahmad ibn
Taymiya) (Cairo, Egypt: l'lnstitut frangais d'archeologie
orientale, 1939), pp. 541-575.
THE MODERNIST ISLAMIC MOVEMENT
15
The effort to rejuvenate Islam involved an intensive
project of outreach and uplift, for which new discur¬
sive strategies were deemed necessary. ‘Ali Mubarak
(Egypt, 1824—1893) made this reasoning explicit in
the introduction to one of the first Arab novels:
I have realized that the readers are inclined to reading
epic tales, narrative fiction, and entertaining works,
rather than works on pure scientific or practical con¬
cerns. The latter works breed boredom and lead the
readers to shun them.... This persuaded me to write
this useful book in a form of attractive narrative to
entice the reader to absorb its useful information and
instructions, which have been collected from many
Arabic and foreign books in arts and sciences. 64
In an early Urdu novel. The Repentance ofNasuh, by
Nazir Ahmad (North India, 1836-1912), the title char¬
acter bums a roomful of old books and identifies the
antidote for such “poison” as “books of faith and
morality.” 65 Similarly, Mahmud Khoja Behbudiy
(Samarqand, 1874—1919; chapter 36), author of the
first modem play in Central Asia, described theater as
“a place for preaching and exhortation.” 66 The first
plays in the Arab world were adaptations of French
works produced in Lebanon in 1847; the first modem
Urdu play was performed in 1853; the first modem
Turkish play was produced in 1859; and other Islamic
regions appear to have followed suit at the end of the
nineteenth and beginning of the twentieth centuries. 67
The third, and perhaps the greatest discursive in¬
novation of the modernist Islamic movement was the
periodical press, which it established in virtually
every community of the Islamic world. Selections in
this anthology include pioneers from Mombasa
(chapter 7) to Durban (chapter 8), and from Malabar
(chapter 42) to Singapore (chapter 46). The relatively
low cost and wide distribution of newspapers, maga¬
zines, and journals opened a stream of words that
reached a relatively large readership (and listener-
64. Sabry Hafez, The Genesis of Arabic Narrative Dis¬
course (London: Saqi Books, 1993), pp. 130-131.
65. Frances W. Pritchett, Nets of Awareness: Urdu Po¬
etry and Its Critics (Berkeley: University of California Press,
1994), p. 186.
66. Adeeb Khalid, The Politics of Muslim Cultural Re¬
form: Jadidism in Central Asia (Berkeley: University of Cali¬
fornia Press, 1998), p. 131.
67. Various articles on “Masrah,” in C. E. Bosworth et al.,
eds.. The Encyclopedia of Islam, 2d edition (Leiden, Nether¬
lands: E. J. Brill, 1991), volume 6, pp. 746-773.
ship, as items were read aloud). The modernist Is¬
lamic movement held great hopes for its impact. A
1907 cartoon in Mulla Nasruddin , for example,
showed a modernist waving a newspaper, causing
traditionally garbed religious scholars to ran fleeing
from the power of the paper. 68 ‘Abduh, as a young
man, paid homage to the power of the newspaper in
a poem, comparing it favorably to the legacy of the
Egyptian pyramids: the newspaper is “the nourish¬
ment of the spirits,” “the tongue of heavenly secrets,”
and “guidance for those who seek.” It “alerts the
unattentive” and “has taken it upon itself to spread
the sciences among the common people.” 69 Later, he
admitted a certain skepticism about this power—
“These days there are people who believe that the
illnesses of nations may be cured with the publica¬
tion of journals” 70 —but participated in producing the
two most influential modernist papers.
An Indian opponent of the modernists mocked their
confidence in the medium: “Faced with a gun, bring
out a newspaper.” 71 Yet conservatives in Malaya
feared the power of periodicals of “the new style”
enough to try to ban “papers debating the Muham-
medan religion” in 1929. 72 Religious conservatives
also made use of the same media, founding periodi¬
cals such as lsha'at al-Sunna (News of Tradition) in
Lahore (founded 1878), Din ve Ma ‘ishat (Religion and
Life) in Kazan (1906-1917), and al-Haqa’iq ( Truths)
in Damascus (1910—1913). 73 In the 1920s, historian
68. Daniel R. Brower and Edward J. Lazzerini, eds.,
Russia’s Orient (Bloomington: Indiana University Press,
1997), p. 192.
69. Jakob Skovgaard-Petersen, Defining Islam for the
Egyptian State: Muftis and Fatwas of the Dar Al-ifta (Leiden,
Netherlands: Brill, 1997). p. 69.
70. Michael F. Laffan, “The Umma Below the Winds:
Mecca, Cairo. Reformist Islam, and a Conceptualization of
Indonesia,” Ph.D. dissertation. University of Sydney, Aus¬
tralia, p. 170.
71. Ralph Russell. The Pursuit of Urdu Literature (Lon¬
don: Zed Books, 1992), p. 159.
72. William Roff, “Kaum Muda—Kaum Tua: Innovation
and Reaction amongst the Malays, 1900-1941,” in K. G.
Tregonning, ed.. Papers on Malayan History (Singapore: De¬
partment of History, University of Malaya in Singapore,
1962). p. 178.
73. Jalal, Self and Sovereignty, p. 68; Azade-Ay§e
Rorlich, The Volga Tatars (Stanford, Calif.: Hoover Institu¬
tion Press, 1986), p. 60; James C. Gelvin, ‘“Pious' Religious
Scholars, ‘Overly-Europeanized" Falsifiers, and the Debate
about the ‘Woman Question' in Early Twentieth-Century
Damascus” (paper under review).
16 Introduction
‘Abd al-Wasi al-Wasi‘i (Yemen, died 1959), a sup¬
porter of the isolationist Yemeni imamate. credited
newspapers as “the great force, the instructive school,
the scales for [weighing] the activity of the commu¬
nity and the indicator of its condition, the vigilant
overseer of the government.” 74 Religious conserva¬
tives also published printed books rather than relying
exclusively on hand-copied manuscripts. 75
The press brought news of parallel and compet¬
ing movements around the world. Like other periodi¬
cals of the era, they often reprinted, translated, or
summarized articles they found interesting from other
periodicals, increasing the density of linkages across
regions and language groups. In addition, they trum¬
peted models of successful modernization. Japanese
military victories over Russia in 1904, for example,
were carried “live” in the newspapers of the world,
offering inspiration. The Malay newspaper al-lmam
(chapter 46) commented on “the ascent of the Japa¬
nese race . . . who defeated the six-foot-tall giants,”
and referred to writings on Japan by the Egyptian
nationalist Mustafa Kamil (Egypt, 1874-1908). The
Iranian newspaper Hahl al-niatin (The Firm Rope),
published in Calcutta, wrote at length on the impli¬
cations of Japan’s success. 76 “We need an indepen¬
dent renewal like that of Japan,” Rida wrote years
later in Egypt (chapter 6).
The immediacy of the periodical press, especially
daily newspapers, expressed in its very form the
modernists’ view of progress. Each issue presented
the latest word, superseding previous statements. A
properly informed person had to keep up with break¬
ing news and ongoing debates. The newspaper for¬
mat exerted pressure toward brevity, glibness, and a
minimum of scholarly citations. As a result, news¬
paper writers were vulnerable to accusations of shal¬
lowness. Yet in the competition for religious author¬
ity, writers without seminary training may have
74. Brinkley Messick, The Calligraphic State: Textual
Domination and History in a Muslim Society ("Berkeley: Uni¬
versity of California Press, 1993), p. 118.
75. Francis Robinson, “Technology and Religious
Change: Islam and the Impact of Print,” Modem Asian Stud¬
ies, volume 27, number 1, 1993, pp. 229-251; Muhammad
Qasim Zaman, “Commentaries, Print, and Patronage: Hadith
and the Madrasas in Modem South Asia,” Bulletin of the
School of Oriental and African Studies, volume 62, num¬
ber 1, 1999, pp. 60-81.
76. Habl al-matin (The Firm Rope), August 17, 1906,
pp. 12-16.
preferred to write texts without detailed citations and
extended quotations, which seminary-trained writers
were more adept at producing.
A similar case could be made for lectures, which
eager students or the lecturers themselves sometimes
published. Afghani’s Calcutta lecture on teaching
and learning (chapter 11), for example, was published
despite Afghani’s complaint that his host “caused this
talk to be delivered only in an abbreviated form.”
Similarly, ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Maghribi (Lebanon,
1867-1956; chapter 27) published a lecture in Beirut
despite complaining that his host “gave me time only
for a phone call. So forgive me if I hasten or if I gloss
over certain aspects.” These inelegant, ritualized
apologies may mask the lack of full scholarly appa¬
ratus expected of written work on religious subjects.
In sum, the modernist movement adapted tradi¬
tional literary forms to modernist purposes and pio¬
neered new forms, especially a periodical press that
emphasized the contemporaneity of knowledge and
deemphasized scholarly citation.
What to Speak
The substance of the modernist Islamic appeal may
be summarized in any number of ways. I choose to
emphasize five general topic areas, each of which is
deep enough to capture a significant portion of the
modernist writings included in this anthology, and
wide enough to involve significant differences of
opinion within the modernist movement. Religious
interpretation has already been covered in this intro¬
duction, and we turn now to the other four.
Cultural Revival
The sense that cultural decline had gripped the Is¬
lamic world was not limited to modernist authors.
Conservatives also pointed to the massive changes
they were witnessing, as for example Akbar
Allahabadi (North India, 1846-1921):
The minstrel and the music—both have
changed.
Our sleep has changed, the tale we told has
changed.
The nightingale now sings a different song.
The color in the cheeks of spring has changed.
Another kind of rain falls from the sky.
THE MODERNIST ISLAMIC MOVEMENT
17
The grain that grows upon our land has
changed.
A revolution has brought this about.
In all the realms of nature all has changed. 77
The distinctiveness of the modernists lay in seeing
modernity as a promising avenue for cultural revival.
Modernists described this revival with a handful
of recurrent metaphors. One set involved light, as in
the European Enlightenment. “Originally, religion
shines, but later it appears to become dull,” wrote
Achmad Dachlan (Java, 1868-1923; chapter 47).
“Truly, it is not religion that becomes dull, but the
person who follows the religion.” Such imagery was
incorporated into the words for “intellectual”:
munawwar al-fikr (enlightened of thought), derived
from nur (light), used in Arabic, Ottoman Turkish,
and Persian; and ziyali (person associated with ziya,
or light), used in Uzbek. A second set of images in¬
volved awakening. “Throughout the world a spirit of
awakening has encompassed the Muslims,” Ahmed
Aghayev (Azerbaijan, 1865-1939; chapter 31) wrote
in an optimistic moment. Less optimistically, Fitrat
(chapter 34) worried that Muslims “will sleep forever
in the land of dishonor, lowliness, and anonymity.”
“Awake ye Arabs and recover,” began a poem posted
around Beirut and Damascus in 1880, 7S a motif
adopted in the poetry of Central Asian nationalism:
“Waken, Kazakh!” in 1911 ; 79 “Awaken, homeland
[Turkestan]” in 1918; 80 and “Awaken! Hey! Uyghur,
it is time to awaken” in the early 1930s. 81 A third set
involved motion, such as the “principle of move¬
ment” that Iqbal sought to recover in The Reconstruc¬
tion of Religious Thought in Islam} 2 A fourth set of
77. Ralph Russell, Hidden in the Lute: An Anthology of
Two Centuries of Urdu Literature (Manchester, England:
Carcanet, 1995), p. 201.
78. A. L. Tibawi, Arabic and Islamic Themes (London:
Luzac & Company, 1974), pp. 119, 308.
79. Gulnar Kendirbay, “The National Liberation Move¬
ment of the Kazakh Intelligentsia at the Beginning of the 20th
Century,” Central Asian Survey, volume 16, number 4, 1997,
p. 496.
80. Hamza Hakimzada Niyaziy, Tola asarlar toplami
{Complete Collection of Works) (Tashkent, Uzbekistan: Fan,
1988-1989), volume 2, p. 145. Translation from Uzbek by
Adeeb Khalid.
81. Justin Jon Rudelson, Oasis Identities: Uyghur Na¬
tionalism Along China’s Silk Road (New York: Columbia
University Press, 1997), p. 148.
82. Iqbal, The Reconstruction, pp. 139-170; also in
Kurzman, ed. Liberal Islam, pp. 255-269.
images involved rebirth and renewal, often with ref¬
erence to the Protestant Reformation in Christianity.
“Truly, we are in a dire need for renewal and renew-
ers,” wrote Rida (chapter 6). This effort must com¬
bine “religious renewal and earthly renewal, the same
way Europe has done with religious reformation and
modernization.” Iqbal (chapter 41), in a moment of
respect for the West, drew on parallel imagery:
Germany has witnessed the upheaval of the
Reformation, which has erased all marks of
earlier times.
The sanctity of the temple priest has been
nullified, and the delicate ship of thought has
embarked on its course.
The French have also seen a revolution, which
has overturned the world of the Westerners.
The descendants of the Greeks, aged by their
worship of antiquity, have become youthful
again with the pleasures of renewal.
The soul of the Muslim has a similar ferment
today, [but] this is a divine secret which the
tongue is unable to express.
Let us see what springs from the bottom of this
ocean; let us see what colors the sky now
turns. 83
The modernists disagreed vehemently among
themselves as to the extent to which cultural revival
must erase existing cultural forms. Those who fa¬
vored almost complete erasure crossed the line from
Islamic modernism to secular modernism, as in the
case of Hasan Taqizada (Iran. 1878-1969), who fa¬
vored “absolute submission to Europe, and the as¬
similation of the culture, customs, practices, organi¬
zation, sciences, arts, life, and the whole attitude of
Europe, without any exception save language.” 84
Islamic modernists, by contrast, justified the erasure
of aspects of recent culture as a recovery of older or
more authentic culture. In the words of Khayr al-Din
(chapter 2), “There is no reason to reject or ignore
something which is correct and demonstrable sim¬
ply because it comes from others, especially if we had
83. Muhammad Iqbal, “Masjid-i Qurtuba” (Cordova
Mosque), in Kulliyat (Complete Works ) (Aligarh, India: Edu¬
cational Book House, 1995), pp. 391-392. First published in
1933. Translation from Urdu by Muhammad Qasim Zaman.
84. Ali Mirsepassi, Intellectual Discourse and the Poli¬
tics of Modernization: Negotiating Modernity in Iran (Cam¬
bridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 2000), p. 54.
18 Introduction
formerly possessed it and it had been taken from us.
On the contrary, there is an obligation to restore it
and put it to use.” In more provocative language.
Halide Edib Adtvar (Turkey, 1882-1964; chapter 28)
wrote that “all-round Westernization” reinforced
rights that “Islam had already proclaimed ... a thou¬
sand years ago,” and expressed the “vital racial in¬
stinct” of “the Turkish soul.”
Adtvar’s reference to race introduces the issue of
purportedly biological social hierarchies, which
modernists valued along with other “scientific” doc¬
trines of the era. Certainly many Muslims engaged
in racial discrimination prior to the modern era, just
as Europeans and others did. 85 Arabs such as
Kawakibi (chapter 19) objected to Ottoman Turkish
“use of the term ‘Arab’ for slaves and black animals.”
Non-Arab Muslims such as Marmaduke Pickthall
(England, 1875-1936) detected and detested the ten¬
dency among Arab scholars to “think that the Arabs
are still ‘the patrons’, and the non-Arabs their ‘freed-
men’. .. ,” 86 One modernist theme was the erasure
of these racialized distinctions, for example the cam¬
paign in Southeast Asia to allow female descendants
of the Prophet Muhammad to marry Muslim men
who did not share this descent. 87 Salim likened this
to “the struggle between aristocracy and democracy,”
and concluded, “It is this spirit of democracy which
constitutes one of the main reasons for the spread of
Islam in the world. Those who extinguish this spirit
belong to those who hamper the development and
spread of Islam.” 88
Yet modernists—Muslim, Christian, and other¬
wise—replaced older forms of racism with a new
version based on scientific research into the alleged
hierarchy and evolution of human capabilities. It may
be unfair to single out a particular author, but
Maghribi (chapter 27) is typical of many modernists
in mentioning groups at a particular “stage in their
social evolution,... in Africa or China for example,
85. Bernard Lewis, Race and Slavery in the Middle East
(New York: Oxford University Press, 1990).
86. Peter Clark, Marmaduke Pickthall: British Muslim
(London: Quartet Books, 1986), p. 64.
87. Natalie Mobini-Kesheh, The Hadrami Awakening:
Community and Identity in the Netherlands East Indies,
1900-1942 (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell Southeast Asia Program,
1999), pp. 91-107.
88. Deliar Noer, The Modernist Muslim Movement in In¬
donesia, 1900-1942 (Singapore: Oxford University Press,
1973), p. 69.
constrained by their social situation or the dis¬
position of their temperament to adopt polygamy.”
A similarly scientized view is evident in Maghribi’s
discussion of women, whose “weak self-confidence,
gullibility, and lack of discipline” are said to jus¬
tify the lesser value of their courtroom testimony.
Similar views have been documented in Egypt and
elsewhere. 89
Modernists also adopted a second form of social
hierarchy, that of capitalism. Some modernists fa¬
vored social-democratic reform—notably Salim
(chapter 49), in this anthology, and Muhammad Hif-
zurrahman Sihvarvi (North India, 1901-1962) 90 —
and an Islamic Communist movement emerged to the
left of the social democrats in Indonesia in the late
1910s, with figures such as Hadji Mohammad Mis-
bach (Java, circa 1876-1940) criticizing Salim and
other Islamic modernists: “To be sure, they perform
the precepts of the religion of Islam, but they pick
and choose those precepts that suit their desire. Those
that do not suit them they throw away. Put bluntly,
they oppose or defy the commands of God ... and
rather fear and love the will of Satan—that Satan
whose evil influence is apparent in this present age
in [the system of[ Capitalism.” 91 Support of capital¬
ism was indeed the dominant economic theme in the
modernist Islamic movement. Khayr al-Din (chap¬
ter 2) praised societies in which “the circulation of
capital is expanded, profits increase accordingly, and
wealth is put into the hands of the most proficient
who can cause it to increase.” Salah al-Din Khuda
Bakhsh (North India, 1877-1931) espoused the right
of Muslims “to attend to their religious obligation
without sacrificing their worldly prosperity. . . .” 92
Modernists made a moral distinction between rich
people who invested in modern economic and cul¬
tural enterprises and those who did not, denouncing
the latter for their “submersion ... in luxury and
89. Eve Troutt Powell, Different Shades of Colonialism:
Egypt, Great Britain, and the Mastery of the Sudan, 1865-
1925 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002), chap¬
ter 4.
90. Aziz Ahmad. Islamic Modernism in India and Paki¬
stan, 1857-1964 (London: Oxford University Press, 1967),
pp. 201-204.
91. Takashi Shiraishi. An Age in Motion: Popular Radi¬
calism in Java, 1912-1926 (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University
Press, 1990), p. 285.
92. Wilfred Cantwell Smith. Modern Islam in India (Lon¬
don: Victor Gallancz, 1946), p. 32.
THE MODERNIST ISLAMIC MOVEMENT
19
carnal appetites, and their avoidance of any kind
of glory other than ostentation and wealth,” in the
words of Kawakibi (chapter 19). It is probably not
coincidental, and the matter deserves systematic
study, that the modernist movement was bankrolled
in part by industrialists and traders promoting
international economic linkages, such as Husayn
Baybacha, a leading merchant who supported Is¬
lamic constitutionalism in eastern Turkistan in the
early twentieth century, 93 or H. Z. A. Tagiev and
other industrialists who supported cultural reform
in Azerbaijan in the late nineteenth and early twen¬
tieth centuries. 94
Some Islamic modernists worried about wholesale
adoption of Western culture. Bahithat al-Badiya
(Egypt, 1886-1918; chapter 5), while promoting
education in modern subjects, suggested that “If we
pursue everything Western we shall destroy our own
civilization, and a nation that has lost its civilization
grows weak and vanishes.” Rida (chapter 6) assailed
the faction of Egyptians that, “in imitation of the
heretics of Europe and its liberals, is hostile to reli¬
gion and despises the devout, who constitute the
majority of the nation.” Salim (chapter 49) criticized
“ taqlicT ’ of Western manners, and Aghayev mocked
the “Westernized Oriental” as “Western only on the
surface.” Aghayev warned, “Simply to transplant
Western civilization to the Orient will only result in
doubling the misery of the Oriental. One becomes
neither Eastern nor Western, but something in-
between, with all the weaknesses of the one without
the qualities of the other.” 95
Modernists aimed these critiques at one another,
just as religious conservatives aimed them at mod¬
ernists as a whole. All modernists, presumably, con-
93. C. P. Skrine and Pamela Nightingale, Macartney at
Kashgar: New Light on British, Chinese, and Russian Activi¬
ties in Sinkiang, 1890-1918 (London: Methuen, 1973),
p. 157).
94. Audrey Altstadt, “The Azerbaijani Bourgeoisie and
the Cultural-Enlightenment Movement in Baku,” in Ronald
Grigor Suny, ed., Transcaucasia, Nationalism, and Social
Change, rev. ed. (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press,
1996), pp. 199-209.
95. Edward J. Lazzerini, “Beyond Renewal: The Jadid
Response to the Pressure for Change in the Modem Age,” in
Jo-Ann Gross, ed., Muslims in Central Asia: Expressions of
Identity and Change (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press,
1992), p. 164.
sidered themselves in happy equilibrium, rejecting
existing customs where necessary while maintaining
the most important Islamic values. Yet what to re¬
ject and what to maintain was frequently a subject
of debate. One broad field of disagreement was the
topic of popular religious practices associated with
Sufism. Some modernists had Sufi backgrounds—
the most influential modernist in Damascus, al-
Jaza’iri (chapter 15), was a Sufi sage and justified his
rationalism on thoroughly Sufi grounds. 96 Some
modernists wished to maintain certain Sufi practices
and beliefs, including Frasheri, who urged Albanian
Sufi organizations to develop into a political party; 97
and ‘Ubaydullah Sindhi (Sindh, India, 1872-1944),
who defended Sufi mysticism as both “the basis of
Islam” and “an international or purely human con¬
ception of a universal religion.” 98 More commonly,
modernists held Sufi practices to be abhorrent, espe¬
cially the veneration of saints. 99 The profit to be had
from such practices lured sham clerics eager to “gain
fame and earn more worldly profit,” according to
Fakhreddin (chapter 33). “As a result, the Muslims
were overwhelmed in economic and political affairs,
and so were destined to be crushed under the feet of
others.” At the same time, reformist Sufi leaders con¬
demned certain of their colleagues on similar
grounds, accusing them of “spending their lives in
the pursuit of the things of this world and lavish
lifestyles,” 100 and trying to ban the commercializa¬
tion of religious practices. 101 In relation to Sufism,
as to other Islamic practices and beliefs, the scope
96. Itzchak Weismann, Taste of Modernity: Sufism,
Salafiyya, and Arabism in Late Ottoman Damascus (Leiden,
Netherlands: Brill, 2000), part 2.
97. H. T. Norris, Islam in the Balkans (London: Hurst &
Company, 1993), p. 188.
98. Mazheruddin Siddiqi, Modem Reformist Thought in
the Muslim World (Islamabad, Pakistan: Islamic Research In¬
stitute, 1982), p. 19.
99. Frederick de long and Bernd Radtke. eds., Islamic
Mysticism Contested (Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 1999);
Elizabeth Sirriyeh, Sufis and Anti-Sufis: The Defense, Re¬
thinking and Rejection of Sufism in the Modern World (Rich¬
mond, England: Curzon, 1999).
100. Julia A. Clancy-Smith, Rebel and Saint: Muslim No¬
tables, Populist Protest, Colonial Encounters (Algeria and
Tunisia, 1800-1904) (Berkeley: University of California
Press, 1994), p. 222.
101. Frederick] de Jong, Turuq and Turuq-Linked Insti¬
tutions in Nineteenth Century Egypt (Leiden. Netherlands:
E. J. Brill, 1978), p. 170.
20 Introduction
and meaning of cultural revival was contested both
within and outside the modernist Islamic movement.
Political Reform
A second major goal of the modernists was the
implementation of constitutionalism. Here too, Islamic
dictates on human equality were marshaled in support.
“[Ajlthough God, most exalted, preferred some to
others in endowments, He made them equal in ac¬
countability, with no distinction between the honor¬
able and the base, the leader and the subordinate,”
wrote Tahtawi (chapter 1). “Equality means nothing
but sharing the same laws, and being equal before
them.” Similarly, according to Abdullah Abdurahman
(South Africa, 1870-1940; chapter 8): “If God made
no distinction between man and man, we had no right
to do so. And until we are regarded as equal in this
country, there is no such thing as a democratic insti¬
tution.” Mustafa Fazil Pasha (Turkey, 1829-1875)
wrote in 1866, in one of the earliest manifestos of Is¬
lamic constitutionalism, that Islam dictates human fate
in the afterlife, but does not limit “the rights of the
people,” and therefore cannot justify tyranny: “there
are no Christian politics or Moslem politics,” he ar¬
gued, “for there is only one justice, and politics is
justice incarnate.” 102 Sayyid ‘Ahd al-‘Azam ‘Imad
al-‘Ulama’ Khalkhali (Iran, mid-nineteenth-early
twentieth century), writing soon after the promulga¬
tion of the first Iranian constitution, stressed that
“God has not made any distinction among his obe¬
dient servants. Prophets and messengers, serfs and
kings, the old and the young, men and women, ser¬
vants and masters, religious authorities and the
masses, descendants of the Prophet and non-Arab
Muslims, the rich and the poor, are all equal and
partners in their obligations, according to the laws
of justice, fairness, and equality.” 103
Modernists referred to a variety of sacred sources
to establish the legitimacy of constitutionalism.
Namtk Kemal (chapter 17) quoted the Qur’anic in-
102. §erif Mardin, The Genesis of Young Ottoman
Thought (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1962),
p. 281.
103. Sayyid ‘Abd al-‘Azam ‘Imad al-‘Ulama’ Khalkhali,
“A Treatise on the Meaning of Constitutional Government,”
trans. Hamid Dabashi, in Said Amir Arjomand, ed.. Author¬
ity and Political Culture in Shi'ism (Albany: State Univer¬
sity of New York Press, 1988), p. 337.
junction, “And seek their counsel in the matter”
(Sura 3, Verse 159), concluding that “the salvation
of the state today is dependent upon the adoption of
the method of consultation.” Chiragh ‘Ali (North
India, 1844-1895; chapter 39) argued that “the
Qur’an does not interfere in political questions, nor
does it lay down specific rules of conduct in the Civil
Law,” concluding that “the Qur’an or the teachings
of Muhammad are neither barriers to spiritual devel¬
opment or free-thinking on the part of Muhammad¬
ans, nor an obstacle to innovation in any sphere of
life, whether political, social, intellectual, or moral.”
Na’ini (chapter 13) quoted the Qur’anic verse, “He
[God] cannot be questioned about what He does, but
they will be questioned” (Sura 21, Verse 23), con¬
cluding that “Absolute power belongs only to God,
yet [reactionaries] declared it un-Islamic to struggle
against the absolute power of earthly tyrants.” ‘Ali
‘Abd al-Raziq (Egypt, 1888-1966) quoted Qur’anic
verses referring to the Prophet as a “warner” or a
“reminder,” not a “warden” or a “guardian,” conclud¬
ing that kingship was not required by sacred prece¬
dent. 104 Ibn Badis (chapter 9) quoting a speech of the
first caliph, concluded that “It is the people that have
the right to delegate authority to the leaders and de¬
pose them. No one can rule without the consent of
the people.”
These and other Islamic arguments accompanied
constitutionalist movements around the Islamic
world. Egypt promulgated a constitutionalist docu¬
ment in 1860, and a fuller constitution in 1882; Tu¬
nisia briefly in 1861 and then, after the colonial in¬
terlude, in 1959; the Ottoman Empire briefly in 1876,
then again in 1908; Iran briefly in 1906, then again
in 1909; and so on. 105
Yet the modernists of this period did not neces¬
sarily intend constitutionalism to mean democracy,
as it came to be understood over the course of the
twentieth century: universal adult suffrage, reduction
of monarchs to symbolic offices, and constitutional
protection of a growing list of rights. Suavi (chap¬
ter 16) argued that “democracy is the highest form of
egalitarian government and the most in accord with
the holy law,” but was “not possible when people
lack morals, or unity, or in large countries” such as
the Ottoman Empire, which needed a sultanate to
104. Kurzman, ed.. Liberal Islam, pp. 32-34.
105. Dustur: A Survey of the Constitutions of the Arab
and Muslim States (Leiden. Netherlands: E. J. Brill, 1966).
THE MODERNIST ISLAMIC MOVEMENT 21
remain “in conformity with its geographical location,
circumstances, and population.” The best to be hoped
for, he concluded, was to hold the sultan's ministers
accountable to an elected parliament.
In addition, constitutionalists faced a tension be¬
tween limiting state power to protect liberty and build¬
ing sufficient state power to effect societal changes.
Their solution to this dilemma lay in the idea that rul¬
ing by consent would increase the state’s effectiveness,
as in Khayr al-Din’s formulation (chapter 2): “It is
God’s custom in His world that justice, good manage¬
ment, and an administrative system duly complied
with be the causes of an increase in wealth, peoples,
and property, but that the contrary should cause a dimi¬
nution in all of these things.” Some modernists
adopted the recently developed European view that the
role of the state lay in cultivating consent through train¬
ing, as in a 1903 Egyptian educational text: “There is
no way to educate and strengthen something, except
by training and drilling it in the performance of its
function, until it can accomplish it with smoothness,
speed, and precision.” 106
Other modernists reversed the order and consid¬
ered state power the prerequisite for all other reforms.
The “first conditions of any progress and reform,”
wrote an Iranian educator, were “security and
order” 107 —a view expressed in the Young Turk slo¬
gan of “Union and Progress.” 108 Indeed, one strain
of modernist Islam sacrificed political reform alto¬
gether for the sake of other reforms. In Afghanistan,
for example, the monarch suppressed an Islamic
constitutionalist movement in 1909, executing the
movement’s religious leader, Maulawi Muhammad
Sarwar Wasif (Afghanistan, died 1909). 109 There¬
after, Afghan modernists such as Tarzi (chapter 14)
abandoned hopes for constitutionalism and chan¬
neled their energies into lobbying the king to an-
106. Timothy Mitchell, Colonising Egypt (Cambridge,
England: Cambridge University Press, 1988), p. 89.
107. Darius M. Rejali, Torture and Modernity: Self, So¬
ciety, and State in Modem Iran (Boulder, Colo.: Westview
Press, 1994), p. 48.
108. §erif Arif Mardin. Jon Turklerin Siyasi Fikirleri,
1895-1908 (Political Thought of the Young Turks, 1895-
1908 ) (Ankara, Turkey: Turkiye 1$ Bankast Kiiltiir Yayinlan,
1964).
109. Senzil Nawid, “State, Clergy, and British Imperial
Policy in Afghanistan during the 19th and Early 20th Cen¬
turies,” International Journal of Middle East Studies, vol¬
ume 29. number 4, 1997, p. 598.
nounce social and economic reforms. Tarzi praised
the king in lavish phrases as “his great and enlight¬
ened majesty, the beacon of the nation and the reli¬
gion,” whose “ever-increasing innate talent and
capability has caused continuous growth and
advancement,” making Afghanistan “the beam of
the scale of justice and equality in Asia.” Elsewhere,
he wrote, a nation or fatherland “without Government,
and Government without a King, would resemble in¬
organic substance or a car without an engine.” 110
Science and Education
Modem science held such power, in the world-view
of modernist Islam, that it could only be described
in terms generally reserved for divine entities, as in
this statement by Afghani (chapter 11):
How difficult it is to speak about science. There is
no end or limit to science. The benefits of science
are immeasurable; and these finite thoughts cannot
encompass what is infinite. Besides, thousands of
eloquent speakers and sages have already expressed
their thoughts to explain science and its nobility.
Despite this, nature does not permit me not to explain
its virtues. Thus I say: If someone looks deeply into
the question, he will see that science rales the world.
There was, is, and will be no ruler in the world but
science.
The power of science, Afghani continued, accounted
for the reverses suffered by the Islamic world: “The
English have reached Afghanistan; the French have
seized Tunisia. In reality this usurpation, aggression,
and conquest have not come from the French or the
English. Rather it is science that everywhere mani¬
fests its greatness and power. Ignorance had no al¬
ternative to prostrating itself humbly before science
and acknowledging its submission.”
This oppositional pair, “science” versus “igno¬
rance”—denigrating all forms of knowledge aside
from modem science—paralleled the traditional op¬
position between the age of Islam and the pre-Islamic
age of ignorance ( jahiliyya ). Indeed, numerous mod¬
ernist Islamic authors made the parallel explicit, re¬
counting the scientific advances of the early Islamic
era and their influence on later European scientific
developments. A cartoon in Mulla Nasruddin , for
110. Asta Olesen, Islam and Politics in Afghanistan
(Richmond, England: Curzon Press. 1995), p. 119.
22 Introduction
example, showed a speaker castigating an audience:
“Sirs! There are hundreds of [Qur’anic] verses and
hadiths about science being obligator)' upon all. The
Europeans have taken our ancient science and
reached civilization, but we have remained back¬
ward.” 111 Ameer ‘Ali (Bengal, 1849-1928; chapter
43) credited the Prophet Muhammad as well for his
“devotion to knowledge and science ... distinguish¬
ing him from all other Teachers, and bringing him
into the closest affinity with the modern world of
thought.” The intellectual centers of the early Islamic
centuries, Ameer ‘Ali continued, developed “a true
and strongly marked scientific spirit, which domi¬
nated over all its achievements. The deductive
method, hitherto proudly regarded as the invention
and sole monopoly of modern Europe, was perfectly
understood by the Muslims.”
Pride in the past greatness of Islamic science was
coupled with dismay at later stagnation. Some attrib¬
uted the shift to external forces, such as Ameer ‘Ali’s
emphasis on destruction wrought by the Mongol
conquest. Others attributed the shift to internal de¬
velopments, as in Afghani’s accusation that a reli¬
gious elite “tried to stifle the sciences” and “was
marvelously served in its designs by despotism.”
Frasheri (chapter 18) took this accusation a step fur¬
ther, suggesting that centuries of scientific stagnation
undermined any pride in past accomplishments:
The Europeans borrowed many things from us, that
is to say from our ancestors or more precisely our
coreligionists who lived eight or ten centuries ago;
however, none of the things in their hands today is
something that was borrowed from our ancestors.
Europe borrowed a seed of civilization from the
Islamic world, she planted that seed. It is natural that
a seed should decompose in the earth in order to bear
fruit. That seed decomposed; the cycle has been
repeated many times, with the result that its very
genus has changed. The knowledge that Europe
derived from the scholars of Islam was very
considerable by [the standards of] the time, but by
present- day standards it is nothing.
Along similar lines, Azad ridiculed the attempt “to
invoke the Qur’an to lend its support to the achieve¬
ments of modem research in the different spheres of
scientific thought, as if the Qur’an was delivered over
111. Mulla Nasruddin, May 17, 1909, p. 12. Translation
from Azeri by Hasan Javadi.
1,300 years ago just to endorse in advance, in the
form of riddles, what for centuries, [European scien¬
tists] could find out for themselves without the aid
of any revealed scripture.” 112
A countertheme in modernist Islam held that early
Islamic science was a foreign import, not an expres¬
sion of the original Islamic spirit. Yet this importa¬
tion was a favorable sign of Islam’s openness, in the
view of Khayr al-Din (chapter 2): “If it was permis¬
sible for the virtuous ancestors to take such things
as logic from outside their own religious community,
and to translate it from Greek when they saw it as
being among the beneficial instruments... then what
objection can there be today to our adopting certain
skills that we see we greatly need in order to resist
intrigues and attract benefits?”
For others, importation was problematic. While
expressing deep respect for science, many leading
modernists also worried that excessive respect for
science might result in Muslims’ rejection of Islamic
faith. Afghani accused Ahmad Khan of “naturism,”
and was in turn accused of atheism by conservative
scholars. 113 The danger of atheism helped to moti¬
vate education reform, which was intended to com¬
pete with European-run schools by teaching modern
science along with the belief that science was con¬
sistent with Islam. ‘Abduh, would-be reformer of
al-Azhar in Cairo, criticized Western-style schools
for trying to turn Muslims into Europeans, which
he likened to making chickens lay goose eggs. 114
Gasprinskii (chapter 29), pioneer of jadid schools in
the Russian Empire, excoriated Russian-educated
Muslims who knew European languages and sci¬
ences but were “unable to read and write in their own
national language!” Ahmad Khan (chapter 40),
founder of the Aligarh school in India, sought to pro-
112. AbuT-Kalam Azad, The Tarjuman al-Qur'an {In¬
terpretation of the Qur’an ), trans. Syed Abdul Latif (Bombay,
India: Asia Publishing House, 1962), volume 1, p. xl. First
published in 1930.
113. Sayyid Jamal ad-Din al-Afghani, “The Refutation
of the Materialists,” trans. Nikki R. Keddie and Hamid Algar,
in An Islamic Response to Imperialism: Political and Reli¬
gious Writings of Sayyid Jamal ad-Din al-Afghani (Berke¬
ley: University of California Press, 1968). pp. 130-171; Nikki
R. Keddie, Sayyid Jamal ad-Din “al-Afghani”: A Political
Biography (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1972),
pp. 65-80.
114. John W. Livingston, “Muhammad ’Abduh on Sci¬
ence,” Muslim World , volume 85. numbers 3^1, 1995, p. 224.
THE MODERNIST ISLAMIC MOVEMENT 23
vide an Islamic response to English education, which
left “the inner spirit dead.” 115
Women's Rights
“Except for the Pathan, the women have no enemy.
He is clever but is ardent in suppressing women,” a
Pathan woman named Nagiria wrote in the journal
Pushtun in 1919. “O Pathan, when you demand your
freedom [from the British], why do you deny it to
women?” 116 Similarly, women—and men—in many
Islamic regions began to demand gender reforms of
various sorts in the late nineteenth and early twenti¬
eth centuries, using an Islamic discourse. “Pay atten¬
tion to every comer of the world, we are at the eve
of a revolution,” Fatma Nesibe Hamm (Turkey, mid¬
nineteenth-early twentieth century) told a women’s
conference in Istanbul in 1911. 117
Among the most common themes in this segment
of the modernist Islamic movement was the promo¬
tion of girls’ schooling. Modernists justified girls’
schools on various grounds. One focused on the
rights of women. Rokeya Sakhawat Hossein (Ben¬
gal, 1880-1932), a pioneer in women’s education in
South Asia, emphasized this theme in her presiden¬
tial address to the Bengal Women’s Education Con¬
ference in 1926: “The opponents of female education
say that women will become wanton and unruly. Fie!
They call themselves Muslims and yet go against the
basic tenets of Islam, which accords women an equal
right to education.” 118 As Mazrui (chapter 7), among
many others, emphasized, “The Prophet himself says
that women and men both should be educated.” 119
The rights of women extended to a variety of be¬
haviors, including military service, that women of the
early years of Islam engaged in, wrote Fakhreddin
115. David Lely veld, Aligarh’s First Generation
(Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1978), p, 129.
116. Eknath Easwaran, Nonviolent Soldier of Islam:
Badshah Khan, A Man to Match His Mountains , 2d ed.
(Tomales, Calif.: Nilgiri Press, 1999), p. 105.
117. Aynur Demirdirek, “In Pursuit of the Ottoman
Women’s Movement,” in ZehraF. Arat, ed.. Deconstructing
Images of “The Turkish Woman" (New York: St. Martin’s
Press, 1998), p. 78.
118. Sonia Nishat Amin. The World of Muslim Women
in Colonial Bengal, 1876-1939 (Leiden, Netherlands: E. J.
Brill, 1996), p. 158.
119. Margaret Strobel, Muslim Women in Mombasa,
1890-1975 (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press,
1979), p. 105.
(chapter 33). According to Maghribi (chapter 27),
“Many of the ways [the Prophet] used to treat his
wives we see today as inappropriate and unsuitable,”
such as camel-racing with his wife and watching
entertainment together in a mosque. Aside from edu¬
cation, though, modernists disagreed as to which
rights women should enjoy. In 1917, Muslim
women’s organizations in Russia urged limits on
polygamy, so that it would not infringe on the rights
of first wives; the (male) All-Russia Muslim Con¬
gress, meeting the same year, took a more radical
position, calling for a complete ban. 120 In 1918, a
women’s association in India called for an end to
polygamy, emphasizing the Qur’anic guarantee of
women’s right to equal treatment by their husbands;
other (male) modernists were scandalized, even one
who had himself called for such a ban. 121 Similarly,
modernists debated women’s right to divorce and
their right to participate in politics. The Azerbaijan
People’s Republic granted women’s suffrage in
1918, 122 yet the republicans in Turkey refused, a re¬
fusal that Adivar (chapter 28) called “perhaps a bless¬
ing,” since women have thus “been protected from
the danger of being identified with party politics, and
their activities outside the political world could not
be stopped for political reasons.”
As these examples indicate, gender did not nec¬
essarily predict a modernist’s position on any particu¬
lar aspect of women’s rights. Even hijab —modest
“Islamic” dress—which Western observers took as
a potent symbol of Muslim women’s oppression,
divided modernist Muslims along ideological rather
than gender lines. In Iran, pioneering educator and
editor Maryam Amid Muzayyan al-Saltana (Iran,
died 1919), a woman, defended hijab , but published
the work of other Iranian women who objected to
it. 123 Qasim Amin (Egypt, 1863-1908; chapter 4), a
man, and Nazira Zein-ed-Din (Lebanon, bom circa
120. Marianne R. Kamp, “Unveiling Uzbek Women:
Liberation, Representation and Discourse, 1906-1929,”
Ph.D. dissertation, University of Chicago, 1998, p. 110.
121. Gail Minault, Secluded Scholars: Women's Educa¬
tion and Muslim Social Reform in Colonial India (Delhi,
India: Oxford University Press, 1998), pp. 145-146. 289-
290.
122. Swietochowski, Russian Azerbaijan, p. 129.
123. Afsaneh Najmabadi, “Crafting an Educated House¬
wife,” in Lila Abu-Lughod, ed., Remaking Women: Feminism
and Modernity in the Middle East (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton
University Press, 1998), p. 101.
24 Introduction
1905), !24 a woman, inveighed against hijab, prefer¬
ring the middle-class garb of Western Europeans of
the era; while Rida (chapter 6) and Kaztm, 125 men,
and Bahithat al-Badiya (chapter 5), a woman, de¬
fended it. Bahithat, by contrast, considered it appro¬
priate for women to perform certain forms of work
outside of the home, while the founder of the Soci¬
ety for the Progress of Women, Fatima Rashid
(Egypt, died 1953), associated such work with a dis¬
turbing “third sex.” 126
A second strand justified girls’ schools on the
grounds of benefit to society. Qasim Amin (chap¬
ter 4) adopted the language of women’s rights but
also linked women’s education to the aspirations of
male modernists: “There is a way of raising your¬
selves up to the highest level of civilization—the kind
of civilization you aspire to, and then some. It con¬
sists of liberating your women from the bondage of
ignorance and hijab [here, isolation].” Tahar Haddad
(Tunisia, 1899-1935) attacked those “condemning
women to eternal ignorance, despite all the grave
dangers for our present society and future generations
that illiteracy presents. ... It is critical that women
have access to certain careers of social importance,
such as medical treatment of infants and women’s
diseases, teaching in orphanages and kindergartens,
and all the functions involved with health, education,
and culture, without these activities preventing the
accomplishment of her duties as mother of the fam¬
ily.” 127 Training women for these roles—notice the
gendered limits of Haddad’s list, plus the recurrent
association of women with family—would allow
society to make use of human resources that were
currently being wasted. Zaynab Fawwaz (Lebanon-
Egypt, 1860-1914) objected to any limits on
women’s usefulness: “man and woman are equal in
mental capacity and are two members of one social
body, both of which are equally indispensable. . . .
124. Nazira Zein-ed-Din, “Unveiling and Veiling,” in
Kurzman, ed.. Liberal Islam , pp. 101-106. First published
in 1928.
125. Niliifer Gole, The Forbidden Modern: Civilization
and Veiling (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1996),
p. 42.
126. Beth Baron, The Women’s Awakening in Egypt
(New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1994), p. 147.
127. Tahar Haddad, Notre femme, la legislation islamique,
et la societe (Our Woman, Islamic Legislation, and Society )
(Tunis, Tunisia: Maison Tunisienne de 1'Edition, 1978),
pp. 222-224. First published in 1930.
God in His creation has set laws whose transforma¬
tion cannot be decreed [by humans]. But this trans¬
formation would not occur through employing
women in men’s occupations or men in women’s
occupations.” 128
A variant of this argument, adopted so commonly
that it may well constitute a third strand, held that
schools would make women better mothers. Bahithat
al-Badiya (chapter 5) made this case, responding to
the view—common in global scientific discourse of
the era—that education desexed women: “No mat¬
ter how much a mother has been educated, or in
whatever profession she works, this would not cause
her to forget her children nor to lose her maternal
instinct. On the contrary, the more enlightened she
becomes, the more aware she is of her responsibili¬
ties. Haven’t you seen ignorant women and peasant
women ignore their crying child for hours? Were
these women also occupied in preparing legal cases
or in reading and writing?” The founder of the first
girls’ schools in the Sudan, Babikr Bedri (Sudan,
1860-1954), justified modern education on the
grounds that it “would enable a girl to mn her home
in such a way as to attract educated young men of
her own race, from among her relatives or fellow
citizens. This would help to prevent our educated
men from marrying foreigners, a thing which would
bring to nought our efforts in educating them.” 129
Even quite conservative religious scholars, such as
Maulana Ashraf ‘Ali Thanavi (North India, 1864-
1943), could support women’s education on the
grounds that ignorance, “the ruination of the religion
of the women of Hindustan,... went beyond the
women to their children and in many respects even
had its effects on their husbands.” 130 This line of rea¬
soning allowed some modernists to call for limits on
girls’ education; women needed only to learn child-
rearing, home economics, and moral virtue. In
Ahmad Khan’s words: “The learning that will be
beneficial today to women is the same that benefited
128. Margot Badran and Miriam Cooke, eds.. Opening
the Gates: A Century of Arab Feminist Writing (Bloomington:
Indiana University Press, 1990), p. 223.
129. Babikr Bedri. The Memoirs of Babikr Bedri, trans.
Yusuf Bedri and Peter Hogg (London: Ithaca Press, 1980),
volume 2, p. 132.
130. Barbara Daly Metcalf, Perfecting Women: Maulana
Ashraf 'Ali Thanawi’s Bihishti Zewar (Berkeley: University
of California Press, 1990), pp. 47-48.
THE MODERNIST ISLAMIC MOVEMENT 25
them in the past, namely, religion and practical
morality.” 131
Queen Surayya Tarzi (Afghanistan, 1897-1968),
daughter of Mahmud Tarzi (chapter 14), combined
all three sorts of arguments—benefit to family, bene¬
fit to society, and women’s rights—in consecutive
sentences in her announcement of the opening of the
country’s first girls’ schools in 1921: “Women are
in charge of bringing up the future generation, the
most important responsibility in life. If we deprive
women of education, we have, in effect, incapacitated
half of our body and have destroyed our subsistence
with our own hands. It was not in vain that Hazrat
Muhammad (may peace be upon him) made the ac¬
quisition of knowledge obligatory for both men and
women.” 132
The emphasis on women’s role as mothers was
mirrored in the modernist Islamic discourse on mas¬
culinity. The crisis and decline of the Islamic world
was associated in male authors’ writings with effemi¬
nate men—that is, men who did not embody the
masculine roles associated with success in the mod¬
em world. Malkum Khan (chapter 12) goaded male
readers by noting that certain women “have perceived
the meaning and virtues of Humanity far better than
the men, that is, better than our non-men.” Fitrat
(chapter 34) accused traditional religious scholars of
pederasty—“indecent acts with a beardless youth”—
identifying premodern maleness with homosexual¬
ity, as did a cartoon in Mulla Nasruddin showing
traditionally garbed men groping and kissing danc¬
ing boys, 133 and a Turkish modernist accusing tradi¬
tional religious scholars of “adultery, homosexual¬
ity, drinking”: “How can we restore the vitality of this
great religion with these Shaykh al-Islams [religious
officials], with these snuff-addicted preachers, with
this army of vagabond softas [seminary students]
whose ideas of faith do not go beyond voluptuous
desires to own beautiful girls and boys in Para¬
dise?” 134 Iqbal (chapter 41) turned the image of
emasculation onto modern-educated Muslim men,
bemoaning “the brainy graduate of high culture”—
131. Fazlur Rahman, Islam and Modernity (Chicago, Ill.:
University of Chicago, 1982), p. 77.
132. Senzil Nawid, Religious Response to Social Change
in Afghanistan, 1919-29 (Costa Mesa, Calif.: Mazda Publish¬
ers, 1999), p. 221.
133. Mulla Nasruddin, May 19, 1906, p. 1.
134. Niyazi Berkes, The Development of Secularism in
Turkey, 2d ed. (London: Hurst & Company, 1998), p. 378.
presumptively male—“whose low, timid voice be¬
tokens the dearth of soul in his body, who takes pride
in his submissiveness, eats sparingly, complains of
sleepless nights, and produces unhealthy children for
his community, if he does produce any at all.” Male
modernists projected their conception of an idealized
heterosexual family onto the nation as a whole, rep¬
resenting the nation as a female in need of male sal¬
vation and protection. 135 The male modernist,
Bahithat protested, tends to be “as despotic about
liberating us [women] as he has been about our en¬
slavement. We are weary of his despotism.” 136
The Legacy of Modernist Islam
Many observers of the modernist Islamic movement,
even many sympathetic observers, have said all along
that it won’t amount to much. One British supporter
rescinded his optimism after being attacked in west¬
ern Egypt in 1897, an experience that “has convinced
me that there is no hope anywhere to be found in
Islam. I had made myself a romance about these re¬
formers, but I see that it has no substantia] basis.” 137
In 1916, a Christian missionary concluded from his
study of Islamic modernism that “we need not expect
much to result in the way of uplift to Islam from ra¬
tionalizing and intellectual defence and pruning.” 138
Not all observers have been so critical. For ex¬
ample, the Orientalist Ignac Goldziher (Hungary,
1850-1921), noting the “efforts, in a large number
of theological tractates, to find support in Qur’ an and
hadith for the requirements of modem political life,
as also for the requirements of progress in civil life
135. Lisa Pollard. “Nurturing the Nation: The Family
Politics of the 1919 Egyptian Revolution,” Ph.D. dissertation,
University of California at Berkeley, 1997; Afsaneh
Najmabadi, “The Erotic Vatan (Homeland) as Beloved and
Mother: To Love, to Possess, and to Protect,” Comparative
Studies in Society and History, volume 39, number 3, 1997,
pp. 442^167; Tavakoli-Targhi, Refashioning Iran , pp. 113-
134.
136. Leila Ahmed, Women and Gender in Islam: Histori¬
cal Roots of a Modem Debate (New Haven, Conn.: Y ale Uni¬
versity Press, 1992), p. 182.
137. Wilfrid Scawen Blunt, My Diaries: Being a Per¬
sonal Narrative of Events, 1888-1914 (New York: Alfred A.
Knopf, 1922), p. 276.
138. Samuel Graham Wilson, Modem Movements among
Moslems (New York: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1916),
p. 171.
26 Introduction
(the question of women, etc.),” concluded with cau¬
tious optimism, “These cultural tendencies, inti¬
mately related to religious life, that are making them¬
selves felt in various parts of the Muslim world, carry
the seeds of a new phase in the evolution of Islam.” 139
Many Muslims of the early twentieth century
seem to have agreed with Goldziher’s assessment.
Thousands read modernist Islamic newspapers; hun¬
dreds of thousands of families sent children to re¬
formed Islamic schools; millions of Muslims cele¬
brated the constitutional revolutions in Iran (1906)
and the Ottoman Empire (1908); millions more par¬
ticipated in the anticolonial movements led by Is¬
lamic modernists in North Africa and South and
Southeast Asia. At the same time, millions opposed
the modernist Islamic movement; but sympathy for
the movement appears to have diffused beyond the
elite intellectual circles that spawned it.
In midcentury, such sympathies largely dissi¬
pated, even among the educated. By the 1930s, the
movement was in serious decline, its energies sapped
by secular nationalism, socialism, and fascism, which
emphasized the modernist aspects of modernist Islam;
and by religious revivalist movements emphasizing
the Islamic aspects. Among secularists, the Soviet
Union witnessed the most spectacular denunciations
of previous identities—Azerbaijani Islamic modern¬
ists signed an open letter admitting that “we were
deceived and mistaken” in their earlier views, for
example 140 —but similar transitions occurred even
without the threat of Soviet purges. This split did not
occur evenly throughout the Islamic world: modern¬
ist Islam was still arriving during this period in some
regions, such as West Africa or China, where Ya'qub
Wang Jingzhai (China, 1879-1949; chapter 52) and
others only began to study in the Middle East in large
numbers in the 1920s and 1930s; the Sudan, where
Muhammad Ahmad Mahjub (Sudan, 1908-1976;
chapter 10) and other college graduates developed a
modernist-Islamic nationalism; and the Hadhra-
maut—where a “boomerang effect” brought modem-
139. Ignaz Goldziher, Introduction to Islamic Theology
and Law, trans. Andras and Ruth Hamori (Princeton, N.J.:
Princeton University Press, 1981), pp. 236, 263. First pub¬
lished in 1910.
140. Audrey Altstadt, The Azerbaijani Turks (Stanford,
Calif.: Hoover Institution Press, 1992), p. 131.
ism via Southeast Asia. 141 In regions where Muslim
scholars played an active role in nationalist move¬
ments—Algeria and Indonesia, for example—mod¬
ernist Islam seems to have had greater staying power.
A recent critic has suggested that this bifurcation
reflected a “disintegrative tendency” inherent in the
juxtaposition of “modernist” and “Islamic.” 142 An¬
other approach might view the split-up of modernist
Islam in terms of the weakening of liberalism
throughout the world—not just among Muslims—
during the Interwar period, with authenticity on the
right and the “New Man” on the left crowding out
the toleration of multiple identities, old and new. This
approach might find support in the resurgence of
interest in modernist Islamic figures among Muslim
intellectuals of the late twentieth century, contribut¬
ing to global intellectual trends shifting away from
fascism and communism. Rachid Ghannouchi (Tu¬
nisia, bom 1941) has dedicated his recent work on
civil rights to Afghani, ‘Abduh, and other modern¬
ists. 143 Chandra Muzaffar (Malaysia, born 1947) has
republished excerpts from Ameer ‘Ali and Azad. 144
The centennial of the death of Afghani recently led
a high-level official in the Islamic Republic of Iran
to praise modernism as “necessary for the survival
of Islam at the theoretical, practical, political, and
social levels.” 145
The modernist Islamic movement’s primary leg¬
acy, the aspect that appears to attract contemporary
Muslim thinkers, is its defining feature: the attempt to
reconcile modem values and Islamic faith. Admitting
141. Peter G. Riddell, “Religious Links between
Hadhraraaut and the Malay-lndonesian World, c. 1850 to c.
1950,” in Ulrike Freitag and William G. Clarence-Smith, eds.,
Hadhrami Traders, Scholars, and Statesmen in the Indian
Ocean, 1750s-1960s (Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 1997),
pp. 224-229.
142. Seyyed Vali Reza Nasr, “Religious Modernism in
the Arab World, India, and Iran,” The Muslim World, vol¬
ume 83, number 1, 1993, pp. 43-45.
143. Rachid al-Ghannouchi, al-Hurriyyat al- ‘amma fi al-
dawla al-islamiyya (Public Liberties in the Islamic State)
(Beirut, Lebanon: Markaz Dirasat al-Wihda al-‘Arabiyya,
1993).
144. Chandra Muzaffar, ed., The Universalism of Islam
(Penang, Malaysia: Aliran, 1979).
145. Mohammad Javad Hojjati Kermani, “Modernism.
Islamic Movement, and the Islamic Revolution,” The Iranian
Journal of International Affairs, volume 9, number 1, 1997,
p. 93.
THE MODERNIST ISLAMIC MOVEMENT 27
that one has both modem values and Islamic faith is
the first step in this reconciliation. Some of the admis¬
sions generated in the first century of modernist Islam
may strike later readers as embarrassingly foolish and
craven, such as references to European civilization as
the world’s sole civilization. But rejecting such for¬
mulations does not necessarily amputate the under¬
lying values. Mass education, rapid international com¬
munication, and globalized commodities markets have
generated huge populations in the Islamic world who
are imbued with modem values such as cultural revival
(defined in a particular manner), democracy (on West¬
ern lines), science and education (as practiced glo¬
bally), and particular rights for women (as articulated
by international organizations). Even Islamic revival¬
ists share many of these concerns—though they might
be scandalized by association with their modernist
roots. 146
Accepting modern values as modem is only the
first step in reconciliation. The second step is to theo¬
rize the compatibility of such values with Islamic
faith. This search for consistency may itself be a
characteristically modern concern, as previous eras
were less insistent on the discursive construction of
146. David D. Commins, “Modernism,” in John L.
Esposito, ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Modem Is¬
lamic World (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995),
volume 3, pp. 118-123.
a coherent individual self. Even some modernists
have rejected such an attempt, such as Taha Husayn
(Egypt, 1889-1973), who suggested that every human
is composed of two separate parts, rational and emo¬
tional: “Both of these personalities are connected
with our constitution and make-up, and we cannot
escape from either of them. What, then, is to hinder
the first personality from being scholarly, inquisi¬
tive, critical, and the second believing, assured, as¬
piring to the highest ideals?” 147 More commonly, the
modernist Islamic movement has taken up the task
through a process of double translation: modem val¬
ues into Islamic terms, and Islamic values into mod¬
em terms. Translations are famously imperfect, and
modernist Islam involves particularly difficult pair¬
ings: the Islamic concept of justice with the modern
concept of law and judicial systems; the modem con¬
cepts of citizenship and rights with the Islamic con¬
cept of equality; the Islamic concept of consultation
with the modern concept of constitutional democ¬
racy; and so on. Critics may argue that these concepts
lose something in translation, but the modernist Is¬
lamic movement argued that they gain something
through juxtaposition.
147. Nissim Rejwan, Arabs Face the Modern World
(Gainesville: University Press of Florida. 1998). p. 50.
This page intentionally left blank
SECTION I
Africa
This page intentionally left blank
Rifa‘a Rafi‘ al-Tahtawi
I
The Extraction of Gold, or
an Overview of Paris and
The Honest Guide for Girls and Boys
Rifa'a Rafi‘ al-Tahtawi (Egypt, 1801-1873) was a pioneering figure in the Arab intellectual
awakening of the nineteenth century. Tahtawi was bom in Tahta, Upper Egypt, to a rural
family of modest means yet with a line of descent from the Prophet Muhammad. He
studied for seven years at the famous al-Azhar mosque in Cairo, where his mentor nomi¬
nated him to serve as religious leader for a student mission to Paris. Tahtawi stayed in
France from 1826 to 1831, learned French, and became the mission’s main translator.
He also read the writings of major French thinkers. When he returned to Egypt, Tahtawi
directed the Medical School, then worked as a translator for the Artillery School. In 1835,
he ran the School of Foreign Languages, his own brainchild, which produced thousands
of translated works in various fields. As a result of a falling out with Khedive ‘Abbas (reigned
1848-1854), Tahtawi was exiled to the Sudan, and was only able to return four years
later, after 'Abbas's death. He then assumed the directorship of the Military School and
participated in several educational reform commissions. Tahtawi also served as editor of
the official newspaper and an educational journal. Tahtawi translated two dozen French
works and wrote several original books, including a didactic memoir of his experiences in
France, excerpted here; a program for the reform of Egypt; and a book of guidance, also
excerpted here, whose emphasis on the Egyptian watan (homeland) constituted one of
the first statements of nationalism in the Arab world. 1
The Extraction of Gold, or
an Overview of Paris
Civil Rights Established for the French
[The French Constitutional Charter of June 4,
1814:]
Article 1: All Frenchmen are equal before the law.
Rifa'a Rafi‘ al-Tahtawi, The Extraction of Gold, or an Over¬
view of Paris (Takhlis al-ibriz ila talkhis Bariz), translated
from Arabic by Ihsan ‘Abbas, edited by Ra’if Khuri, revised
by Charles Issawi, in Modern Arab Thought (Princeton, N.J.:
Kingston Press, 1983), pp. 102-105; al-Murshid al-amin li
al-banat wa al-banin (The Honest Guide for Girls and
Boys), in Muhammad ‘Imara, al-A'mal al-kamila It Rifa'a
al-Tahtawi (The Complete Works of Rifa'a al-Tahtawi)
(Beirut, Lebanon: al-Mu’asasa al-‘Arabiyya li al-Dirasat wa
al-Nashr, 1973), volume 2, pp. 429^435, 469^177. First
published in 1834 and 1875, respectively. Translation of
second selection from Arabic and introduction by Emad
Article 2; They pay, without distinction, a speci¬
fied sum of money to the Treasury, each according
to his wealth.
Article 3: Each one is qualified to attain any po¬
sition or rank.
Article 4: Each one has an independent personal¬
ity, whose freedom is guaranteed. Nobody may in¬
fringe upon it except in rights that are stipulated in
the law and in the way the law is deemed applicable
by the judge.
Eldin Shahin. Thanks to Heba Mostafa Risk for her assis¬
tance with this translation.
1, Albert Hourani, Arabic Thought in the Liberal Age:
1798-1939 (London: Oxford University Press, 1970), pp. 67-
83; Khaldun S. al-Husry, Origins of Modem Arab Political
Thought (New York: Caravan Books. 1980), pp. 11—31;
Muhammad ‘Imara, Rifa'a al-Tahtawi: Ra’id al-tanwirfi al-
'asr al-hadith ( Rifa'a al-Tahtawi: Pioneer of Enlightenment
in the Contemporary Era) (Cairo, Egypt: Dar al-Mustaqbal
al-'Arabi, 1984).
31
32 Rifa‘a Rafi‘ al-Tahtawi
Article 5: All who live in France may profess their
religion as it requires, with no intervention by any¬
body; they shall be assisted to accomplish that, and
anybody who molests them in this shall be stopped
from doing so.
Article 6: The religion of the state is the Apos¬
tolic Roman Catholic faith.
Article 7; The maintenance of Catholic and other
Christian churches shall be met by money of the
Christians, and none of that money shall be allocated
for the maintenance of places of worship that belong
to other religions.
Article 8: No one in France shall be denied the
right to print and publish their opinion, provided that
it does not contravene the law. If it does, then it shall
be suppressed.
Article 9; All property and possessions are invio¬
lable and nobody shall encroach on the property of
another.
Article 10; The state shall have the exclusive pre¬
rogative of compelling people to sell their property
for the public welfare, provided that it pays an ade¬
quate price before acquisition.
Rights of the People Secured by
the Parliament
The first article, that is, “All Frenchmen are equal
before the law,” means that all those who live in
France, whether high or low, must, without distinc¬
tion, be subject to the provisions of the law. Legal
proceedings can be initiated even against the king him¬
self, and judgment can be passed against him like
anyone else. Consider this first article: it has great
power in establishing justice, in helping the wronged
and satisfying the poor by convincing them that they
are great as far as legal proceedings are concerned.
This criterion has become one of the most comprehen¬
sive principles among the French. It is clear proof of
how highly justice is valued among them and how
advanced their cultural program has become. What
they hold dear and call liberty is what we call equity
and justice, for to rule according to liberty means to
establish equality through judgments and laws, so that
the ruler cannot wrong anybody, the law being the
reference and the guide. This is indeed a country to
which the following verse applies:
And justice filled it from end to end,
And in it were happiness and sincerity.
In general, if justice exists in any country it must
be considered as relative and not absolute, for abso¬
lute justice as well as perfect faith, complete purity,
and similar things do not exist anywhere, nowadays.
Thus there is no point in limiting impossible things
to the ghoul, the griffin, and the faithful friend, of
which the poet says:
When among the people of my time I found no
faithful friend to choose,
I became certain that the impossible things are
three:
The ghoul, the griffin, and the faithful friend.
This is not tme about the griffin, because it is an
existing species of birds mentioned by botanists.
[Ahmad ibn Muhammad] al-Tha‘labi [died 1035] in
his Qisas al-Anbiya [Stories of the Prophets ] mentions
the story of the griffin and King Solomon and how it
denied predestination. It is tme that the griffin believed
by the common people, Arabs and Franks [Europe¬
ans], to have the head of an eagle and the body of a
lion, does not exist; yet it does exist as a bird.
The second article is purely political. It can be
stated that had taxes been clearly set in Muslim coun¬
tries, as they are in that country, this would have been
a course of satisfaction, especially when zakat [alms
tax], fay' [revenue from state lands], and booty can¬
not meet the need of the Treasury or are prevented
from being levied totally. Taxes might have some
roots in Islamic law according to some sayings of the
Great Imam [Abu Hanifa, circa 699-767]. “Kharaj
land-tax is the pillar of kingship” is an established
maxim among ancient wise men. During my stay in
Paris, I never heard any complaint against taxes,
imposts, and other levies. People do not mind pay¬
ing, because taxes are levied in a way that does no
harm to the payer and at the same time benefits the
Treasury, especially in that the wealthy are protected
against injustice and bribery.
The third article does not cause any harm at all.
One of its merits is that it encourages everyone to
learn, so that all may be promoted to a higher posi¬
tion. Thus the French could acquire different kinds
of knowledge and their civilization is not limited to
one condition like that of the Chinese and the Indi¬
ans, who believe in transmitting arts and crafts from
father to son by inheritance. A historian states that
the law of the ancient Copts assigned to everyone his
own craft, which had to be inherited by his sons. The
reason for such a procedure, according to [this his-
THE EXTRACTION OF GOLD AND THE HONEST GUIDE 33
torian], is that all arts and crafts were considered
honorable. This procedure was necessitated by cir¬
cumstances, for it helped them reach the degree of
perfection in their arts, because the son usually im¬
proves on what he witnessed his father doing many
times and does not direct his desire to another craft.
This method usually cut the roots of covetousness
and kept everybody content with his craft. Thus one
does not aspire to what is higher but directs his at¬
tention to inventing new things that can carry’ his craft
to a higher degree of perfection.
The answer to what this historian claims is that
not everyone has the natural aptitude to learn his
father’s craft. To confine him to it might produce an
unsuccessful craftsman, whereas if other crafts were
open to him he would prove to be successful and
achieve his aim.
The fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh articles are very
useful for both natives and foreigners. Thus the popu¬
lation of this country increased and its culture pro¬
gressed with the many foreigners who migrated to it.
The eighth article encourages every man to express
his opinions, to propagate his knowledge and to say
whatever occurs to him if it does not harm others. In
this way a man comes to know what his fellow men
are thinking, especially on reading the daily sheets
called “journals” and “gazettes,” which publish up-to-
date news, both domestic and foreign. Although these
abound with innumerable lies, they still contain news
which the people may wish to know. They may also
contain newly established scientific matters, useful
notices, or profitable advice, coming from the noble
and the vulgar. Sometimes the latter discover what the
former miss. It is said: “Do not look down upon a great
opinion given to you by a lowborn man, for the pearl
does not lose its value because of the mean status of
the diver.” A poet also said:
When I heard of him I heard of one, and when I
saw him he was to me the whole universe
Every kind of game is in the belly of the onager
and one man can represent all the good men.
One of the great merits of the newspaper is that if a
man does an outstanding deed, whether good or bad,
it is reported in the paper, and made known to all
people, high and low. Thus the doer of good deeds is
encouraged and the doer of evil ones restrained. If a
man is wronged by another, he states his case in the
newspaper to make it known to high and low, with¬
out any alteration in, or deviation from, facts; the case
gets to the courts and is dealt with according to estab¬
lished laws, making it thus a good lesson to others.
The ninth article is the heart of justice itself. It is
essential to curb the oppression of the weak by the
strong. For it to be followed by the tenth article is
mere propriety.
A Discourse on the Homeland
The homeland [watan] is the nest of man, where he
toddled and from which he emerged, the congrega¬
tion of his family, and part of his inner self. It is the
homeland whose soil, food, and air have raised him,
whose breeze has reared him and in which he grew
up. Abu ‘Amr ibn al-‘Ala’ [linguist and poet, 689-
770] said: what proves the freedom of humanity and
the generosity of its nature is the longing for home¬
land, yearning for the return of compatriots, and
weeping over the passage of time. Generous people
long for their beloved ones like the lion longs for its
jungle, and rational people yearn for their country
like the high-born yearn for their resting-place. Free
people do not prefer any country to their homeland,
and are never patient being away from it. [...] Noth¬
ing keeps away sane people from their homeland
except the search for eminence, if it could not be
achieved within. [...]
It has been the custom that those who are away
from the homeland where they spent part of their
youth, yearn for it, whether they be Bedouin or city
people. The Bedouins regret leaving Najd, and yearn
for it the same way people might yearn for the gar¬
dens of Damascus. [. . .] So if we show some of the
merits of the mother of the world and of the bless¬
ings [that is, Egypt], which is the quiver of God in
His land, it appears to us that it is considered the first
of all homelands in the world, which deserves its
children’s hearts to be inclined toward it. It is most
worthy for the souls of its people who are separated
from it to yearn for it.
The Egyptians' Attachment to
Their Homeland
Nobody doubts that Egypt is an honorable home¬
land, even if we refrain from calling it the most hon¬
orable place. It is the land of honor and glory in the
past and the present, and much came in its praise in
clear [Qur'anic] verses and hadiths [traditions of the
34 Rifa‘a Rafi‘ al-Tahtawi
Prophet], as if it was the image of everlasting para¬
dise engraved across the earth by the divine hand
of wisdom, which gathered life’s merits in it, until
it nearly confined them in its corners and regions.
[■■■]'
[Egypt is] described by all in terms of courage,
enthusiasm, prudence, and leadership, in addition to
intelligence, insight, pleasant attributes, and morals.
[.. .] It has the right to be respected by all nations
and faiths, and the states and kings of the world. In
old times, they adopted much of its brilliance in sci¬
ence and knowledge, which engulfed the world and
led it to towering heights.
It is still the pride of every time. Its exquisiteness
adorns every place. Its share of civilization is im¬
mense. [...] It is said: Among Egypt’s characteris¬
tics is the abundance of currency in it, and those who
enter it and do not get rich, God will never enrich
them. [...] Some said: Among Egypt’s characteris¬
tics is that the Egyptian who seeks a homeland in
another place lives in humiliation. Its kings and lead¬
ers were greeted as “mighty one,” as stated in the
Noble Qur’an. In general, countries are both praised
and insulted. It was said: the world is Basra [a city
in Iraq], and Baghdad has no equal. Al-Hajjaj [ibn
Yusuf, governor, 660-714] used to say: Kufa [a city
in Iraq] is a beautiful young girl that possesses no
money; it is sought for its beauty. We say: Egypt is
a young bride adorned with money and beauty, and
is sought for its money and beauty. It now combines
the old and the new; it is the source of splendor and
pleasantries; it offers benefits to the seekers of the
best; it is prominent in every art; and it is the urban
[city] of Africa, and all else is a desert.
It is indeed across the nights and days a source
of happiness, the heir of Dar al-Salam [the House
of Peace, a description of heaven], and the adorn¬
ment of the territories of Islam. Its king is mighty,
its people are dignified and strong, loved by the
children of [other] countries, adhering to the hadith:
“Love of homeland is part of faith.” By God’s will,
it is secure and safe against the accidents of time.
On the Children of the Country and
Their Responsibility
The wisdom of the One Able King [God] has so des¬
tined that the children of the homeland are always
united in language, in entering under the care of a
single king, and in following a single law and a single
policy. This is what proves that God, most exalted,
has prepared them for cooperation in the reform of
their country, that they would be to one another like
the members of one family, as if the homeland were
the home of their parents and the place of their
upbringing—so may it be a place for mutual happi¬
ness between them. The one nation should not be
branched out into various parties with different opin¬
ions for what follows from this of quarreling, envy,
hatred, and the insecurity of the homeland. One
should not wish for his own happiness and the mis¬
ery of others, especially that the shari'a and politics
made them equal and required them to be on the heart
of one man [united], and not to take as an enemy for
them except that who inflicted failure on them with
his deceit, so that the system of their rule is disturbed
and the order of their path unravels. This is the evi¬
dent enemy who does not like the people of the home¬
land to be secure of their country and to enjoy their
freedom.
The Rights of the Citizen
Also, the children of the homeland—those who origi¬
nated in it, or those who came and settled and adopted
it as their homeland—are affiliated with it: first to its
name, so they are called “Egyptian,” for example; or
to the people, so they are called “native”; or to the
homeland, so they are called “patriot.” This means that
they enjoy the rights of their country. The greatest of
those rights is complete freedom in social association.
Patriots are not characterized by freedom except when
they follow the law of the land and assist in its imple¬
mentation. Their adherence to the rules of the coun¬
try requires, implicitly, that the country guarantee them
the enjoyment of civil rights and civil privileges. Only
in this sense are they patriots and natives, meaning that
they are considered members of the community. They
relate to it as organs relate to the body. This is the
greatest privilege in civilized nations. This privilege,
one of the greatest virtues, has been denied to the
people of most nations. When rulers reigned by whim,
doing what they pleased, the people had no way to
oppose their rulers or defend the rulings of the shari ‘a.
They were not able to tell their kings what they saw
as inconsistent, contribute to matters of policy and ad¬
ministration, or give their views on issues. They were
like foreigners in government affairs, and they only
held jobs or positions below their qualifications. Now
ideas have changed, and those dangers have been re-
THE EXTRACTION OF GOLD AND THE HONEST GUIDE 35
moved from the children of the country. Now, true
patriots can fill their hearts with the love of their home¬
land, because they have become members of it.
The Responsibilities of the Citizen
Patriots who are faithful in their love of homeland
redeem their country with all their means, and serve
it by offering all they possess. They redeem it with
their soul, and repel anyone who seeks to harm it the
same way a father would keep evil away from his
child. The intentions of the children of the country
must always be directed toward the country’s virtue
and honor, and not toward anything that violates the
rights of their countries and fellow countrymen. Their
inclination should be toward that which brings bene¬
fit and goodness. Likewise, the country protects its
children from all that harms them, because of its
possession of those characteristics. The love of home¬
land and the promotion of the public welfare are
among the beautiful characteristics that get inculcated
into each person, constantly, throughout one’s life,
and make every one of them loved by the others. No
one could be happier than the human beings who are
naturally inclined to keep evil away from their home¬
land, even if they must harm themselves to do so.
The quality of patriotism requires not just that
humans demand the rights they are owed by their
homeland. They must also carry out their obligations
toward the country. If the children of the homeland
fail to earn the rights of their country, then the civil
rights to which they are entitled will be lost.
In olden times, the Romans used to force citizens
who reached twenty years of age to give an oath that
they would defend their country and their govern¬
ment. They required a pledge to this effect, the text
of which is:
“May God be my witness that I shall carry the
sword of honor to defend my country and its people
whenever there is a chance I would be able to assist
it. May God be my witness that I am willing to fight
with the army or on my own for the protection of the
country and religion. May God be my witness that I
shall not disturb the serenity of my country, nor be¬
tray it or deceive it, and that I shall sail on the seas
whenever necessary in all conquests that the govern¬
ment orders, and that I pledge to follow present and
future laws and customs in my country. May God be
my witness that I shall not tolerate anyone who dares
violate them or undermine their order.”
Based on this, it is understood that the Roman
nation firmly adhered to the love of country, and that
is the reason it reigned over all the countries of the
world. When the quality of patriotism was removed,
failure beset the members of this nation, its affairs
were ruined, and the order of its system disintegrated
by the numerous disagreements of its princes and the
multiplicity of its rulers. After being ruled by one
Caesar, it was divided between two Caesars in the
east and the west, the Caesar of Rome and the Cae¬
sar of Constantinople. Power that had belonged to
one mighty force was split into two minor forces. All
its wars ended in defeat, and it retreated from a per¬
fect existence to nonexistence. This is the fate of any
nation whose government is in disarray, and whose
state is disorganized.
On Civilizing the Homeland
Civilizing the country allows civilized people to
improve their physical and moral condition. It im¬
proves morals and customs, perfects socialization,
motivates people to be inclined toward commendable
qualities, fulfils civic perfection, and promotes pros¬
perity. This is what civilization is for the nation re¬
siding in the homeland. Individuals may differ with
regard to [the level of] advancement and improve¬
ment. Civilization varies, both for nations and indi¬
viduals. That is why you find one kingdom more
advanced in civilization than another, and also one
person more civilized than another with regard to the
improvement of condition and status.
Contrary to civilization is crudity, which involves
the lack of prosperity in the standard of living. There
is no doubt that the laws delivered by the prophets are
the essence of true civilization to be considered and
adopted. The principles and rulings that arrived with
Islam have certainly civilized all the countries of the
earth, and the lights of right guidance reached beyond
the horizons. God’s Prophet [Muhammad], may peace
and prayer be upon him, said: “I was sent to you with
a clear Abrahamic shar'd a. that no prophet came with
before. Had my brother Moses and all the prophets
been in my time, they would have followed only my
shari"a.” Anyone who practiced the science of the
fundamentals of fiqh [Islamic jurisprudence], and
learned its regulations and rules, would ascertain that
all the rational deduction—which the minds of the
people of civilized nations developed and used as the
basis for the laws of their civilization and laws—hardly
36 Rifa‘a Rafi' al-Tahtawi
go beyond those fundamentals upon which the
branches of fiqh were built, and around which trans¬
actions revolve. Similar to the science we call the fun¬
damentals of fiqh, they have the science of “natural
rights” or “natural law”—rational regulations, stipu¬
lating good and bad, upon which they base their civil
laws. What we call the branches of fiqh, they call civil
rights or laws. What we call justice and benevolence,
they call freedom and equality. The love of religion
and the desire to protect it, whose adherence distin¬
guishes the people of Islam from other nations in
power and defense, they call love of country. But for
us, the people of Islam, love of country is but one of
the branches of faith, and the protection of religion is
the core of all pillars. Every Islamic kingdom is a
homeland for all those in it who belong to Islam. It
combines religion and patriotism. Therefore, its chil¬
dren are obliged to protect it, for both reasons. But the
practice has run to confine [this love] to religion be¬
cause of its importance, while still desiring the home¬
land. Zeal for one’s country could be entirely for rea¬
sons of citizenship and status. This could be the case
of the Qaysi, the Yemeni, the Egyptian, and the Syr¬
ian. However, in the homeland all humankind is equal.
We find that parties, despite their differences, unite
against the foreigner to protect their country, their re¬
ligion, or their kind.
The benefits of civilization are numerous, and
around them revolve all the sciences of life and de¬
struction. That is why some have said: as civiliza¬
tion advances among the kingdoms of the earth,
wars diminish, hostility decreases, conquests be¬
come less brutal, instability and revolutions become
rarer and disappear completely, unlawful enslave¬
ment and bondage end, and poverty and humilia¬
tion vanish.
On the Reasons for Civilization
Also among the reasons for civilization on earth:
adhering to shari'a ; promoting science and knowl¬
edge; advancing agriculture, commerce, and indus¬
try; and discovering the countries that can help
achieve all this, inventing machines and equipment
that facilitate the path to civilization by providing the
ways and means. Printing houses, for example, as¬
sisted education and learning, which are among the
pillars of civilization. It is said that the first inventor
of printed books in Europe was the German nation,
and that it traveled from there to Chinese lands. The
people of France at that time were in a deep sea be¬
cause of blind ignorance, and in a bottomless pit
because of coarseness. They believed that printers
were sorcerers, and wanted to kill them. But they
were saved by Louis XI, the king of France [reigned
1461-1483], who put the printing houses under his
protection. Then printing reached the rest of the coun¬
tries of Europe, and from there the countries of the
East and Egypt.
Freedom of Opinion and Expression
Among the things that helped to broaden the scope
of civilization in the countries of the earth is the
kings’ approval for scientists and possessors of
knowledge to write legal, philosophical, literary, and
political books. [There was an expansion] of freedom
in this respect by disseminating [aspects of civiliza¬
tion] through print and pictures, especially in the
daily newspapers of the countries of Europe, [thanks
to] the law of freedom of expression. The only con¬
dition is that [this freedom] should not destabilize the
government and should take a moderate path, with¬
out neglect or excessiveness.
Among the greatest supports to civilization is the
freedom of navigation and travel, on land and sea.
Travel brought all the kingdoms of the earth fortune,
wealth, and familiarity with the wonders of the world.
The Arabs of Islam used to travel to discover new
countries and bring their people to the religion of the
best of people [that is, the religion of the Prophet
Muhammad], They discovered countless lands and
seas; they civilized countless people on the islands
of the [Indian] Ocean and its shores. Then shrewd and
attentive Europeans followed their example and dis¬
covered a new world, previously unknown to the
ancients. The greatest aid in navigating the sea is the
invention of the “compass,” which is the “house of
the needle.” It was said to be invented by the Arabs
of Islam, traveling to all sides of the [Indian] Ocean
to spread Islam to the barbarian nations of these re¬
gions. It was [also] said that the house of the needle
was invented by none but the Europeans. In sum, we
may say: the Arabs invented this machine, and the
Europeans worked to perfect and improve it, and to
produce it in large quantities. It is a box, in which is
fixed a magnetized iron needle, always heading to¬
ward the North Pole, and never deviating from it,
except for a small deviation. Inside it are drawn the
four directions: north, south, east and west. [The
THE EXTRACTION OF GOLD AND THE HONEST GUIDE 37
function of this compass] is to determine the blow¬
ing of the four original winds and the catastrophic
wind. With this [compass] the captains at sea are
guided toward their destinations. As a result, most
kingdoms of Europe are masters of sea power. How¬
ever, the greatest sea power is the kingdom of the
British, then the kingdom of France and the Sublime
State [the Ottoman Empire], which has a strong naval
power, and whose ports which cannot be matched in
impenetrability and security. The Egyptian govern¬
ment has important ports that could be [world] lead¬
ers, centers of trade in all sorts of exports and imports,
aided by the advantage of the Mediterranean and Red
Seas.
Policy experts have said that a kingdom’s sea
power should be relative to its land power, and in
accordance with the greatness of its dominion. The
most beneficial thing in demonstrating the sea power
of a kingdom is that its banner be allowed to sail in
the sea and to be respected throughout the seas of the
world. Among the advantages of sea power is that it
helps in promoting agriculture, trade, and industry,
especially in colonies outside the kingdom. The na¬
tion that desires many ships and ports must increase
the planting of forests and tree farms, to grow the
proper wood so that the naval kingdom can build its
fleet. If that is difficult, it must obtain the appropri¬
ate ships through purchase from foreign countries to
the extent that satisfies its needs. Sea power is a plen¬
tiful source to broaden the scope of civilization,
which is built upon justice and public freedom.
On Public Freedom and Social Equality
Freedom is the license for permissible action with¬
out an impermissible obstacle or a prohibited objec¬
tion. The rights of all the people of the civilized king¬
dom are based on freedom. In a kingdom that has
obtained its freedom, social association is permitted,
and each individual may move from one house to
another and from one place to another, without ha¬
rassment or coercion. People may do as they please
with themselves, their time, and their work. They are
restrained only by the limits prescribed by law or
politics, which are required by the principles of their
just kingdom. Among the rights of civil freedom is
the human being’s right not to be forcibly exiled or
punished, except by a legal or political ruling in ac¬
cordance with the principles of the kingdom. People
are not restrained from dealing with their money as
they please, and it will not be confiscated, except in
accordance with the laws of the country. Their opin¬
ion on any subject may not be muffled, on condition
that what they say or write does not violate the laws
of the country.
The Types of Freedom
Freedom is divided into five types: natural freedom,
behavioral freedom, religious freedom, civil freedom,
and political freedom.
Natural freedom originated with humankind, and
molded it. Humans cannot suppress natural freedom
without being considered unjust. For example, eat¬
ing, drinking, and walking—things common to all
individuals, that they cannot do without, so long as
they do no harm to the individual or to others. Over¬
eating, for example, is not allowed, as is eating poi¬
son, or eating other people’s food without their
permission.
Behavioral freedom involves commendable con¬
duct and noble morals. It is the attribute necessary
for every member of the community—as deduced
from the rules of reason, and as required by the in¬
tegrity of the individual, since one’s conscience rests
upon the goodness of one’s behavior in dealing with
others.
Religious freedom is the freedom of faith, opin¬
ion, and doctrine, on condition that it adheres to the
principles of religion, like the doctrinal views of the
Ash’aris [followers of Abu’l-Hasan al-Ash’ari, 873-
925] and the Maturidis [followers of Abu Mansur al-
Maturidi, died circa 944], and the followers of
madhhabs [legal schools] who exercise ijtihad [reli¬
gious interpretation] on minor issues. The human
being feels secure in following one of the madhhabs
and in adhering to it in matters of worship. The same
applies to the freedom of political madhhabs, that is,
the opinions of the heads of official administrations
in implementing their principles, laws, and decrees
according to the codes of their countries. Monarchs
and their ministers are unrestricted in the different
ways [they formulate] political procedures, as long
as they refer to consistent criteria, for that is good
politics and justice.
Civil freedom involves the rights of a city’s resi¬
dents and communities toward each other. It is as if
the social community formed out of the people of the
kingdom, joining together to honor each other’s
rights, so that each individual has pledged to the oth-
38 Rifa‘a Rafi‘ al-Tahtawi
ers to help them in all their activities that do not vio¬
late the law of the country. [In return.] they do not
oppose the individual, and they all repudiate anyone
who would impinge on the individual’s freedom, on
condition that the individual does not trespass the
limits of the law.
Political freedom refers to the state. It exists when
the state assures all of its people their legitimate and
recognized property, and the practice of their natu¬
ral freedom without infringement of any kind. Thus,
every individual may engage in all legitimate trans¬
actions regarding personal property, so long as one
avoids harming one’s compatriots. The government
has thus guaranteed human happiness.
The Relation between Freedom
and Happiness
Freedom, in all these meanings, is the greatest
means for making the people of kingdoms happy.
If freedom is built on just and sound laws, it will
be a great means in comforting the people and mak¬
ing them happy in their countries. It provides a rea¬
son for their love of their countries. In short, the
freedom of the people of every kingdom can be
summed up in the right to do what is legal, and the
right not to be coerced into doing what is unlawful
in their kingdom. Every member of the community
is allowed to enjoy all that is permitted in the king¬
dom. Restricting what people are allowed to do,
without a legitimate reason, is considered to be a
denial of their recognized right of happiness. Who¬
ever restricts them arbitrarily has stripped them of
a recognized right, and thereby would be infring¬
ing upon their rights, and opposing the laws of the
country. If the freedom of the people is accompa¬
nied by the justice of monarchs, combining toler¬
ance with firmness and reverence, the state need not
fear freedom. The two rights [of the state and the
individual] will counterbalance each other; and the
ruler and the ruled will both be happy.
The Duty of the Free toward Their Country
As freedom is naturally imprinted on the hearts of
humans, and as divine wisdom has decreed that hu¬
mans be dignified above all others, and not deni¬
grated or humiliated, so should they devote their free¬
dom to honoring their country, their compatriots, and
their ruler. If people feel obligated to serve their coun¬
try, then they will not consider it an infringement
upon their rights when the government collects taxes
to fight enemies or contribute to government expen¬
ditures. This is part of their duty toward their coun¬
try; and since the enemy transgresses by invasion,
people will have to fight and repel him. This in real¬
ity is nothing but a protection of freedom. Among the
splendors of the nation’s freedom is that this nation
also feels happy with the freedom of other nations,
and is hurt by the enslavement of the nations of the
world that have no freedom.
The greatest freedom in the civilized kingdom is
the freedom of agriculture, trade, and industry. Per¬
mitting them is one of the principles of the art of
governmental administration. Evidence has proven
that this freedom is of the greatest public benefit, and
that human beings have been inclined toward it for
centuries, as civilization has advanced. The greatest
difficulty for the person who appreciates the benefits
of these arts is to see these spheres restricted. But the
reason for the restriction might be that the monarchs
of the kingdom perceive their subjects as unqualified
for this freedom, because of their incomplete civil
education. When education progresses and condi¬
tions improve, they will allow people the freedom of
expanded spheres of agriculture, trade, and industry.
Socializing people and improving their conditions
will equip their minds with good judgment and [the
ability] to handle huge operations.
Some wise people said: allow me to improve edu¬
cation, and I will devote myself to improving the con¬
ditions of the whole world. Human minds, once they
reach a lofty level in understanding the knowledge of
daily life, expand commerce and continuously invent
equipment and machines contributing to the public
welfare. People of that era strive to perfect the prac¬
tice of their business and work. Clever people in agri¬
culture, industry, and trade can record and document
all their inventions in books, and abundant profits and
gains, thriving day by day, will thus be multiplied by
knowledge. It is not surprising for a kingdom, where
the sciences of management and banking have pro¬
gressed, where their strong principles and solid foun¬
dations have been mastered, to reap public benefits and
financial fruits. It would not be surprising for the same
benefits to be generated, and expanded in practice,
among those who live nearby and compete with the
people of that kingdom in these sciences. And free¬
dom is associated with equality, and both are associ¬
ated with justice and benevolence.
THE EXTRACTION OF GOLD AND THE HONEST GUIDE 39
Equality
Equality among the members of a society is a natu¬
ral human quality, which makes each one equal in
civil rights to another. It encompasses civil and public
freedoms, because all people share common at¬
tributes. Each has two eyes, two ears, two hands, and
the senses of smell, taste, and touch. Each needs sus¬
tenance. Therefore, all are on equal footing in life,
and have the same right to the necessities of life. They
are all equal in this respect, and no one is preferred
over others in terms of survival.
But if we examine the matter thoroughly, we find
that this equality is illusory. Divine Providence has
already privileged some over others. Some were
granted magnificent qualities while others were not,
and thus differed in moral makeup, and also in physi¬
cal qualities, some bodies being strong and others
weak. And although God, most exalted, preferred
some to others in endowments. He made them equal
in accountability, with no distinction between the
honorable and the base, the leader and the subordi¬
nate. This is ordained and articulated in all the books
revealed to His messengers, may peace and prayer
be upon them. Equality means nothing but sharing
the same laws, and being equal before them. This
equality cannot be suspended by human legislation.
If people can be proven to be equal in rights, it fol¬
lows that they must cooperate to remove a public
threat, as its removal would serve their public inter¬
est. If their country suffers a mishap, they must to¬
tally put aside their private privileges. They must
adhere to equality and forget privilege. Thus, equal¬
ity would be associated with freedom when the ban¬
ner of war is brandished. To this a third character
would be added: their concern for the continuation
of their country’s stability and public welfare, the
prevention of internal disorder, and the resolution of
the source of civil strife. Any nation that considers
equality the basis of its laws and natural rights, and
continues to observe this equality, will establish its
freedom on firm grounds, and its kingdom will have
a strong basis, without internal or external distur¬
bances. It will be strong enough to defend its territo¬
ries, protect its country, and fend off the aggression
of its neighboring kingdoms. This nation is strong,
inside and outside, and revered by all.
Equality in rights is nothing but the legal ability
of the human being to do, attain, or prevent all that
is possible for others to do, attain, or prevent legally.
All people manage their property and rights in a
similar manner, regardless of their status in the king¬
dom, noble or mean. All are equal in their conduct.
It makes sense, therefore, that human equality in
rights requires equality in the responsibilities that
people owe one other. Equality in rights is associ¬
ated with equality in obligations. As humans de¬
mand their rights, they must [in turn] fulfill their
responsibility. Equality means trusting all the people
of the kingdom, without distinction, to perform their
obligations toward each other. Obligations are al¬
ways associated inseparably with rights. In any case,
the legal and political obligations around which the
world revolves are based upon rational and sound
principles devoid of inhibitions and doubts, because
shari‘a and politics are based on a wisdom that we
can perceive, through worship, a wisdom that is
known to God the Su Stainer, most exalted and glo¬
rified. We cannot depend on what the mind likes or
detests, unless shari'a law has stipulated its right¬
ness or distastefulness.
Justice
Those who perform their duties and receive their
proper due from others, and persevere in so doing,
are characterized by justice. Justice is a quality that
induces humans to be rightful in words and conduct,
and to be just with themselves and others. Some
philosophers perceived [justice] as the virtue of all
virtues and the basis for human society, moderniza¬
tion, and civilization. It is the cornerstone of the es¬
tablishment of kingdoms, whose affairs cannot be
managed without it. All other virtues stem from jus¬
tice. They form part of its attributes, but with spe¬
cific names such as sympathy, chivalry, piety, love
of country, sincerity of the heart, internal purity,
generosity, moral decency, modesty, and the like. All
these are the products of justice. The noble hadith,
the saying of [the Prophet], may peace and prayer be
upon him, [states]: “None of you is a believer until
you love for your brother what you love for yourself.”
This is the highest level of justice, and it is consis¬
tent with the wisdom of the philosophers and the laws
of the Messengers prior to Islam. It is supported by
shari‘a and nature, although the support of natural
laws should not be taken into consideration unless it
is stipulated by the Legislator.
2
Khayr al-Din
The Surest Path
Khayr al-Din al-Tunisi (Tunisia, 1822-1890) was a prominent reformer and effective states¬
man. Khayr al-Din was a Circassian who was enslaved and sold to a notable in Turkey,
where he spent seventeen years before being brought to the court of the Tunisian ruler.
Still a teenager, he studied in the ruler's palace and then joined the Bardo Military School,
where he received Arabic and Islamic education and learned modem military sciences.
Khayr al-Din's remarkable talents facilitated his ascendance to the premiership of Tunisia
(1873-1877) and of the Ottoman Empire (1878-1879). He was the main inspiration
behind the promulgation of a constitution and the establishment of a parliament in Tu¬
nisia in I860, which he headed. As Tunisia’s prime minister, he introduced influential fi¬
nancial, administrative, agricultural, and educational reforms. He founded the Sadiqiyya
School in 1875, whose combination of Islamic and modem education produced much of
the elite that later struggled for Tunisian independence from the French, His tenure as
Grand Vizier of the Ottoman Empire was brief, lasting only eight months, and constrained
by the autocratic tendencies of the sultan. After his dismissal, Khayr al-Din went into
retirement in Istanbul, His major written work, the book excerpted here, contained Khayr
al-Din's political visions and his program of reform. He advanced strong arguments for
the acquisition of Western institutions, values, and practices that he considered compat¬
ible with the Islamic shari'a, prime among them the concept of liberty. Khayr al-Din ar¬
gued that liberty, both personal and political, is crucial for peace and prosperity. 1
In the name of God, the beneficent, the merciful.
Praise be to Him who made prosperity one of the
results of justice and endowed mankind with intel¬
ligence, by which He made it possible for man to
attain right conduct and the various gradations of
knowledge. And commanded him to cooperate in
good works and to fear God to the exclusion of idols
or transgression.
I praise Him. He is to be praised at all times and
in all tongues. And I pray for His servant and our
master Muhammad, who was sent with the Book and
the Balance. To whom it was revealed that God com¬
mands justice and charity. And I pray for his family
and his companions, the guardians of his Holy Law,
Khayr al-Din, The Surest Path (Aqwam al-masalik ), translated
from Arabic by Leon Carl Brown (Cambridge, Mass.: Cen¬
ter for Middle Eastern Studies, Harvard University, 1967),
pp. 71-96, 160-165. First published in 1867. Introduction by
Emad Eldin Shahin.
1. Ahmed Amin, Zu'ama’ al-islah ft al-‘asr al-hadith
(Leaders of Reform in the Modern Era) (Cairo, Egypt:
Maktabat al-Nahda al-Misriyya, 1979), pp. 158-197; A.
Alaaddin (Jetin, Tunuslu Hayreddin Pa§a (Khayr al-Din
which is suitable for all times. Whose rulings de¬
scribe orbits around the two points of faith and God's
protection.
After this invocation the compiler of these pages
says, “May God guide him to the surest path.”
After I had long contemplated the causes of the prog¬
ress and backwardness of nations, generation after
generation, relying on the Islamic and European his¬
tories I was able to examine, and on what the authors
of both groups have written concerning the Islamic
umma [community], its attributes, and its future, ac¬
cording to evidence which experience has decreed
should be accepted, I decided to assert what I believe
no intelligent Muslim will contradict and no one who
Pasha of Tunis), 2d ed. (Ankara, Turkey: Kiiltiir Bakanligi,
1999); Albert Hourani. Arabic Thought in the Liberal Age,
1798-1939 (London: Oxford University Press, 1970), pp. 84—
95; Khaldun S. al-Husry, Origins of Modem Arab Political
Thought (New York: Caravan Books, 1980), pp. 33-53;
G. S. van Krieken, Khayr al-Din et la Tunisie, 1850-1881
(Khayr al-Din and Tunisia, 1850-1881) (Leiden. Nether¬
lands: E. J. Brill. 1976).
40
THE SUREST PATH 41
has been shown the evidence will oppose: if we con¬
sider the competition of nations in the fields of civili¬
zation and the keen rivalry' of even the greatest among
them to achieve what is most beneficial and helpful,
it becomes clear that we can properly distinguish what
is most suitable for us only by having knowledge of
those outside our own group, and especially of those
who surround us and live close to us.
Further, if we consider the many ways which have
been created in these times to bring people and ideas
closer together, we will not hesitate to visualize the
world as a single, united country peopled by various
nations who surely need each other. The general
benefit to be derived from the experience of each
nation, even when it is pursuing its own personal
interests, suffices to make it sought after by the rest
of mankind.
Whoever considers these two undoubtedly true
principles, and who according to religion knows
that the Islamic shari ‘a [religious law] is a guaran¬
tor for the two worlds, will necessarily recognize
that secular organization is a firm foundation for
supporting the religious system. Such a person will
then be saddened to see that certain ‘ulama ’ [reli¬
gious scholars] of Islam who are entrusted to take
into consideration the changing circumstances of
time in the application of the Law are opposed even
to learning about domestic events, and their minds
are empty of any knowledge of the outside world.
This is undoubtedly one of the most imposing ob¬
stacles to a knowledge of the most appropriate course
of action in this world.
Is it fitting that the physicians of the umma should
be ignorant of its ailments? Or that they should di¬
rect their concern to acquiring the essence of knowl¬
edge to the exclusion of its contingent circumstances?
We are likewise saddened by such ignorance on the
part of certain statesmen and a feigning of ignorance
by others out of a predilection for despotism.
For this reason I was fired to believe that if I as¬
sembled what years of thought and reflection had
produced, plus what I had seen during my travels to
the various states of Europe where I had been sent
by His Excellency the Bey [Muhammad al-Sadiq,
ruler of Tunisia, 1859-1882], then my effort might
not be without benefit, especially if it comes upon
hearts working together in defense of Islam.
Thus, the object of this book is to remind the
learned ‘ulama ’ of their responsibility to know the im¬
portant events of these days and to awaken the heed¬
less both among the politicians and all the classes
of the people by demonstrating what would be a
proper domestic and foreign conduct. It is also to
call attention to these aspects of the Frankish [Eu¬
ropean] nations—especially those having close con¬
tacts or attachments with us—which ought to be
known. This includes their own eagerness to learn
about other nations. The folding-in of the globe,
whose farthest distance is now connected with its
nearest, makes this easier.
With God’s help I have collected all possible in¬
formation about European inventions related to eco¬
nomic and administrative policies, with reference
to their situation in earlier times. I have shown their
progress in the governance of mankind, which has
led to the utmost point of prosperity for their coun¬
tries. I have also noted the superiority formerly held
by the Islamic umma (as attested by even the most
important European historians) in the two fields of
knowledge and prosperity at a time when the shari ‘a
exerted its influence on the umma ’s conditions, and
all conduct was regulated accordingly.
The purpose in mentioning how the European
kingdoms attained their present strength and worldly
power is that we may choose what is suitable to our
own circumstance which at the same time supports
and is in accordance with our shari’a. Then, we may
be able to restore what was taken from our hands and
by use of it overcome the present predicament of
negligence existing among us.
In addition, other material which the reader might
properly expect on such a subject, including obser¬
vations based either on precedent or reasoning, will
be found throughout the several chapters.
I have called the book The Surest Path to Knowl¬
edge Concerning the Conditions of Countries. It is
made up of an introduction and two books, each of
which has several chapters.
With the guidance of God we seek the paths of
integrity and correctness. Should this prove to be
above my own powers, the indulgence of my distin¬
guished readers is to be hoped for as a means of avert¬
ing my own poverty. And good intentions are, if the
All-High God so wills, a sufficient guarantee to the
attainment of aspirations.
The motive for a work is its true beginning. There¬
fore it is appropriate that we set out our motive in
writing. Nor will we be content to indicate what com¬
pelled us to compose this work. Rather we believe it
42 Khayr al-Din
important to build certain arguments upon it. Our
incentive is a desire to accomplish two tasks leading
to one ultimate goal.
The first task is to spur on those statesmen and
savants having zeal and resolution to seek all pos¬
sible ways of improving the condition of the Islamic
umma and of promoting the means of its development
by such things as expanding the scope of the sciences
and knowledge, smoothing the paths to wealth in
agriculture and commerce, promoting all the indus¬
tries, and eliminating the causes of idleness. The
basic requirement is good government, from which
is bom that security, hope, and proficiency in work
to be seen in the European kingdoms. No further
evidence is needed of this.
The second task is to warn the heedless among the
Muslim masses against their persistent opposition to
the behavior of others that is praiseworthy and in
conformity with our Holy Law, simply because they
are possessed with the idea that all behavior and or¬
ganizations of non-Muslims must be renounced, then-
books must be cast out and not mentioned, and any¬
one praising such things should be disavowed. This
attitude is a mistake under any circumstances.
There is no reason to reject or ignore something
which is correct and demonstrable simply because
it comes from others, especially if we had formerly
possessed it and it had been taken from us. On the
contrary, there is an obligation to restore it and put
it to use. Anyone devoted to religion should not be
deterred from initiating the commendable actions
related to worldly interests of one religiously mis¬
guided. This is what the French have done. By
ceaselessly emulating what they deem good in the
work of others, they have attained the sound orga¬
nization of their affairs in this world to be witnessed
by all. Discriminating critics must sift out the truth
by a probing examination of the thing concerned,
whether it be word or deed. If they find it to be
correct, they should accept and adopt it whether or
not its originator be from among the faithful. It is
not according to the person that truth is known.
Rather, it is by truth that the person is known. Wis¬
dom is the goal of the believer. One is to take it
wherever one finds it.
When Salman the Persian [a companion of the
Prophet], may God be pleased with him, indicated to
the Prophet of God, may God bless him and grant him
peace, that the Persians had a custom, when besieged
by the enemy, of surrounding their cities with a moat
as a protection against attack, the Prophet of God, may
God bless him and grant him peace, took his advice
and dug a moat around Medina when it was attacked.
He even worked in it himself in order to exhort the
Muslims. ‘Ali [ibn Abi Talib, son-in-law and fourth
successor of the Prophet, reigned 656-661], may God
honor him, has said, “Do not pay attention to who
spoke, but pay attention to what was said.” If it was
permissible for the virtuous ancestors to take such
things as logic from outside their own religious com¬
munity, and to translate it from Greek when they saw
it as being among the beneficial instruments—so much
so that [Abu Hamid Muhammad] al-Ghazzali [1058—
1111] said, “The learning of a man having no knowl¬
edge of logic is not to be trusted”—then what objec¬
tion can there be today to our adopting certain skills
that we see we greatly need in order to resist intrigues
and attract benefits?
In the Sunan al-Muhtadin [Traditions of the
Rightly Guided] by the Maliki scholar Shaykh al-
Mawwaq [Abu ‘Abdullah al-Gharnati, Andalusian
judge, died 1492] is found the following, “The acts
of non-Muslims which we have forbidden are those
which violate the requirements of our canon law.
There is no need to abandon acts practiced by non-
Muslims that are in accordance with the shari ‘a cate¬
gories of obligatory, recommended or permissible
because the Holy Law does not forbid the imitation
of anyone who does what God permits.”
On the margin of Durr al-mukhtar [The Selected
Pearls ] by the learned Shaykh Muhammad Ibn ‘Abidin
al-Hanafi [jurist of Damascus, 1783-1836] is found
the following, “There is no harm in imitation of that
which is linked to the good of the believers.”
Actually, if we reflect on the situation of those
critical Muslims and the European actions they ap¬
prove of, we find them refusing to accept tanzimat
[administrative reforms of the nineteenth century]
and its results, while not avoiding other things
which harm them. We see them vying with each
other in clothing, home furnishings, and such every¬
day needs just as in weapons and all military re¬
quirements. The truth is that all of these things are
European products. There is no hiding the disgrace
and the deficiencies in economic development and
public policy which overtake the umma as a result.
The disgrace is our needing outsiders for most ne¬
cessities, indicating the backwardness of the umma
in skills. The shortcoming in economic develop-
THE SUREST PATH 43
ment is the failure to use our country’s industries
to process the goods we have produced, for this
should be a major source of gain. Corroboration of
this statement is in seeing, for example, our shep¬
herd, or silk farmer or cotton farmer, defying fatigue
for the entire year, sell the produce of his labor to
the European for a cheap price, and then in a short
time buy it back, after it has been processed, at a
price several times higher. In sum, we now get only
the value of our land’s raw materials. We receive
none of the increased value resulting from the manu¬
facturing process, the basic means of creating abun¬
dance. both for us and for others. Under these cir¬
cumstances, if we considered the total of what is
exported from the kingdom and compared it with
the imports and found that the two approximate each
other, it would be the lesser of two evils, for if the
value of imports exceeds the exports, ruin will un¬
avoidably take place.
As for political imperfections, the kingdom’s
need for others stands as an obstacle to its indepen¬
dence and a weakener of its vigor, especially when
linked to the need for military necessities, which if
easy to purchase in peacetime are not easy in time
of war, even at many times the value. There is no
reason for all this except European technical
progress resulting from tanzimat based on justice
and liberty. How can a thinking man deprive him¬
self of something which, in itself, he approves of?
How can he lightly turn down what will benefit him,
simply because of unfounded misgivings and mis¬
placed caution? It is worth mentioning in this con¬
nection the statement of a European author on mili¬
tary policy, “Kingdoms which do not keep pace
with the military inventions and tactics of their
neighbors risk becoming, sooner or later, their
prey.” He singles out military matters because that
is the subject of his book, but it is equally neces¬
sary to keep up with one’s neighbors in all aspects
of progress, military or non-military. Supporting
what we have related is the statement of the Prophet,
may God bless him and grant him peace, to ‘Asim
bin Thabit [companion of the Prophet, died 625] in
the hadith , “Let him who fights, fight as his adver¬
sary fights.” The meaning of this hadith is made
clear in the advice of Abu Bakr [first caliph, reigned
632-634] to Khalid ibn al-Walid [Muslim general,
died 642], may God be pleased with both of them,
when he sent him to fight the apostates. He said, “O
Khalid, may the strength and support of God be con¬
veyed through you to those with you,” and he went
on to say, “May the people of al-Yamama be seized
with fear. After entering their country, match cau¬
tion with caution. When you meet a fighting party,
fight them with the same weapons they use to fight
you—arrow for arrow, spear for spear, sword for
sword.” If Abu Bakr had known this age, he would
have said instead cannon, rifles, armored ships, and
other such inventions needed for defense. Without
these the state of preparation imposed by the Holy
Law will not be attained. This requires knowledge
of the capabilities of any potential aggressor and an
effort to mobilize against him equal or superior
strength, which also entails a knowledge of the
means leading to this goal. For this reason it can be
asked, can we today attain such a level of prepara¬
tion without progress in the skills and bases of
growth to be seen among others? Can this progress
be successful without our implementing political
tanzimat comparable to those we see among others?
These institutions are based on two pillars—justice
and liberty—both of which are sources in our own
Holy Law. It is well known that these two are the
prerequisites for strength and soundness in all king¬
doms. Therefore we must press on to the purpose
of this book which is to reveal the conditions of the
European nations, including what might be suitable
for the Islamic umma.
The present situation in the kingdoms of Europe
has not long been firmly established. After the attacks
of the northern barbarians and the fall of the Roman
Empire in 476, Europe fell into a shocking state of
savagery, lawlessness and oppression, beginning a
movement of decline—which is naturally quicker
than that of advance. Europe remained in the noose
of slavery to its kings and oppressive grandees of the
several nations, called noblesse, until the rule of
Emperor Charlemagne [742-814], king of France,
and most of the kingdoms of Europe in 768. He ex¬
erted every effort to improve the condition of the
people by striving to promote knowledge, and in
other ways. Then, after his death, Europe returned to
its darkest period of ignorance and oppression by its
rulers, as will be shown in detail. It is not to be imag¬
ined that Europe’s peoples arrived at their present
state because of a marked fertility or temperateness
of its regions, for similar or even better conditions
are found in other parts of the world. Nor is it due to
the influence of their Christian religion. Although it
does urge the enforcement of justice and equality
44 Khayr al-Din
before the law, Christianity does not interfere in po¬
litical behavior, because it is founded on the concept
of retirement from the world and asceticism. Even
Jesus, upon him be peace, forbade his disciples from
opposing the kings of this world in what relates to
politics saying that he did not have dominion over
this world, for the authority of his holy law was over
the spirits and not the bodies.
Also, the imperfections existing in the provinces
of the pope, leader of the Christian religion, because
of his unwillingness to imitate the political order¬
ing recognized in the rest of the European king¬
doms, is a clear sign of what we have mentioned.
Rather, Europe has attained these ends and progress
in the sciences and industries through tanzimat
based on political justice, by smoothing the roads
to wealth, and by extracting treasures of the earth
with their knowledge of agriculture and commerce.
The essential prerequisite for all of this is security
and justice, which have become the normal condi¬
tion in their lands. It is God’s custom in His world
that justice, good management, and an administra¬
tive system duly complied with be the causes of an
increase in wealth, peoples, and property, but that
the contrary should cause a diminution in all of
these things. This is well known from our Holy Law
and from both Islamic and non-Islamic histories.
The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him
peace, has said, “Justice brings glory to the religion,
probity to constituted authority and strength to all
orders of the people, high and low. Justice guaran¬
tees the security and well-being of all subjects.” A
Persian maxim affirms, “The king is the foundation,
and justice is the guardian. What has no foundation
will be destroyed, and [what has] no guardian will
be lost.” The Nasa'ih al-Muluk [Advice to Kings,
by al-Ghazzali] asserts that the possessor of author¬
ity needs a thousand qualities, all of which can be
grouped into two. If he acts by these two he will be
just. They are providing for the country’s prosper¬
ity and the security of its subjects.
Anyone who leafs through the third section of
Book One of Muqaddima [The Prolegomenon ], by Ibn
Khaldun [Tunisian historian, 1332-1406], will find
conclusive proof that oppression foreshadows the ruin
of civilization, whatever its previous condition. Man’s
natural propensities are such that unrestricted author¬
ity for kings brings about some kind of oppression.
This has occurred today in certain Islamic kingdoms.
It happened in European kingdoms during those cen¬
turies when royal despots had absolute power over
God’s creatures, without the restraint either of ordi¬
nances based on reason, since that was incompatible
with their appetites, or of religious law, this being
nonexistent in Christianity, which is built on retire¬
ment from the world and asceticism, as has been said.
That some of the European kingdoms were on the
verge of vanishing and losing their independence was
due solely to their poor conduct resulting from the
unlimited authority of kings, which is to be contrasted
with the good behavior of their neighbors at that time
from among the Islamic umma. This was the result of
their mlers being restricted by shari ‘a laws applicable
to both religious and secular matters. Among its care¬
fully guarded principles are the release of the creature
from the exigency of his own passions, the protection
of the rights of mankind, whether Muslim or not, and
consideration of the public interest appropriate to the
time and the circumstances, giving priority to avert¬
ing corruption over that of advancing the public in¬
terest, carrying out the lesser of two evils when one is
necessary, and other matters of this nature.
Among the most important of the sharp a principles
is the duty of shura [consultation] with which God
charged His impeccable Prophet, may God bless him
and grant him peace, although Muhammad could
have dispensed with this since he received inspira¬
tion directly from God, and also because of the many
perfections which God had placed in him. The under¬
lying reason for this obligation upon the Prophet was
that it should become a tradition incumbent upon
later rulers.
Ibn al-‘Arabi [Andalusian jurist, 1076-1148] has
said, “Consultation is one of the foundations of the
religion and God’s rule for the two worlds. It is a duty
imposed upon all men from the prophet to the least
of creatures.” Among the sayings of ‘Ali, may God
be pleased with him. is, “There can be no right be¬
havior when consultation has been omitted.” One of
the principles upon which there is consensus is that
every adult Muslim knowledgeable of what is for¬
bidden is obliged to resist any forbidden act. Al-
Ghazzali, the proof of Islam, has said, “The caliphs
and kings of Islam want to be refuted, even if they
should be in the pulpit.”
‘Umar ibn al-Khattab [second caliph, 634-644],
may God be pleased with him, once said while
preaching, “O people, let him among you who sees
any deviation in me set it right.” A man stood up and
THE SUREST PATH 45
said, "By God, if we saw in you deviation we would
rectify it with our swords.” ‘Umar replied, “Praise
God who created in this umnm him who would rec¬
tify with his sword my deviations.” There can be no
doubt that if a just imam [leader] such as ‘Umar, vig¬
orous in defending religion and the rights of the ca¬
liphate, had not believed such a harsh retort to be in
accordance with the shari'a, he would not have
praised God but would have been impelled to oppose
it and to rebuke the man who spoke. Al-Ghazzali
relates also in the section on "Commanding the Good
and Forbidding the Evil” in the Ihya ' [Revival] that
Mu‘awiyya [ibn Abi Sufyan, caliph, 661-680] with¬
held the people’s allowances, and Abu Muslim al-
Khawlani [famous ascetic, died 682] came before
him saying, "This is not from your toil, nor from that
of your father or mother.” Mu‘awiyya, after stilling
his anger with water for ritual ablution, replied, “Abu
Muslim is right. This is not the result of my toil nor
my father’s. Come forward for your allowances.”
Without this type of resistance to authority, king-
ship would not be proper for mankind, because some
form of restraint is essential for the maintenance of
the human species, but if people exercising this re¬
straint were left to do as they please and rule as they
see fit, the fruits to be expected from this need to have
a restrainer would not appear to the umma, and the
original state of neglect would remain unheeded. It
is essential that the restrainer should in turn have a
restrainer to provide a check, either in the form of a
heavenly shari‘a or a policy based on reason, but
neither of these can defend its rights if they be vio¬
lated. For this reason it is incumbent upon the
‘ulama ’ and the notables of the umma to resist evil.
The Europeans have established councils and have
given freedom to the printing presses. In the Islamic
umma, the kings fear those who resist evil, just as the
kings of Europe fear the councils and the opinions
of the masses that proceed from them and from the
freedom of the press. The aim of the two [that is,
European and Muslim] is the same: to demand an
accounting from the state in order that its conduct
may be upright, even if the roads leading to this end
may differ. Ibn Khaldun has referred to what we have
mentioned in the chapter on the imamate in his
Muqaddima in saying, “Since kingship is an expres¬
sion of the essential grouping together of humans,
and its basic characteristic is domination and force,
both of which stem from irradicable strength rooted
in mankind, the judgments of the holder of author¬
ity usually turn aside from the right and are unjust to
whoever is under him, for he usually demands of
them that which is not within their power. This is
because of his appetites. For this reason it is diffi¬
cult to obey him. Group feeling is produced leading
to turmoil and fighting. For this reason it is neces¬
sary to return to imposed political laws to which the
masses will submit and let themselves be led to their
authority as was the case with the Persians and other
nations. If the dynasty violates such a policy its po¬
sition will not be well established and its control will
be incomplete. If these laws are imposed by the wis¬
est, most important and most discriminating persons
in the state then it is a policy based on human rea¬
son. If it is imposed from God All-High by means of
a prophet who determines it, it is then a religious
policy valid both for this world and the next.”
The aforementioned benefit will be realized only
if it remains respected through being preserved and
protected by such precepts as commanding the good
and forbidding the evil, as we have said.
Nor do we deny the possibility of finding among
kings one who conducts himself properly in the king¬
dom without consulting “those qualified to loosen
and bind” [political power brokers], and is moved by
the love of justice to seek the aid of an informed loyal
minister to advise him in complicated matters of
public interest. However, this is rare and not to be
taken into account, as it depends on qualities which
are seldom combined in a single person—and even
assuming these qualities were combined in a perma¬
nent manner in one person, they would disappear
with his death. Thus we must assert that the partici¬
pation of those qualified to loosen and bind with the
kings in all policy matters (with responsibility for
administration of the kingdom placed upon the min¬
isters directly responsible, in accordance with pre¬
cise, well-observed ordinances) is the situation most
likely to bring about what is best for the kingdom. It
is, at the same time, the best safeguard for the king.
Consideration of human nature thus makes it clear
that there are only three types of kings. A king might
possess complete knowledge, love what would bene¬
fit the country, and be capable of implementing the
public interests through discriminating supervision.
Or he might possess complete knowledge but have
personal aims or appetites that would prevent him
from carrying out the general public interests. Or he
might be both lacking in knowledge and deficient in
46 Khayr al-Din
executive ability. These same three types can apply
to the chief minister as well. It is clear that the obli¬
gation of consultation and ministerial responsibility
in the case of the first type would not impede the
complete knowledge from achieving its good pur¬
pose. Rather it would help him, since the opinions
of all are an aid in attaining the public interest, just
as this facilitates the maintenance of the monarchy
in the king’s family. If kings are more nearly like the
last two types, then the imperative nature of consul¬
tation and responsibility would be clear, out of the
need for opposition in the second case and for assis¬
tance in the third. In this way the condition of the
kingdom is set right even if the governor is a pris¬
oner of his appetites or is weak in judgment. As the
translator of [John] Stuart Mill [English thinker,
1806-1873] has said, “The English nation reached
its highest peak during the reign of George III
[reigned 1760-1820], who was mad.” This was only
through the participation of those qualified to loosen
and bind, to whom the ministers were responsible.
It might occur to some weak minds that to entrust
with responsibility a minister endowed with good
reputation would repair the disadvantages of the last
two types, so there would be no need for those quali¬
fied to loosen and bind. This is manifestly a mistake,
because the matter of advancing a minister to execu¬
tive power or of removing him is in the hands of the
king, and it is not to be imagined that the king would
advance someone whom he knows would offer seri¬
ous opposition to him. Assuming, however, that such
a minister were appointed and his conduct commend¬
able, then his situation would turn upon two possi¬
bilities. Either he would agree with the king and his
retinue in their aims and appetites, showing in a
manner hardly to be hidden that his own interests
outweighed any concern about the harm done to the
kingdom. Or he could oppose them and order those
functionaries under him to carry out what the inter¬
ests of the country require. In that case, where would
he get this right and by means of what support would
he be able to triumph over that opposition, especially
if there is no Holy Law in operation to protect him
from the factiousness of his enviers, whose fondest
hopes would be to do him harm and in every way
available to them to stop his beneficial activities
which tend to diminish their personal profit? They
might do this by carrying out his orders other than
the way intended, or by delaying them beyond the
appropriate time in order to make manifest the de¬
fects and increase the errors, or by hiding his good
qualities and making public his bad qualities in order
to turn hearts against him. One of the supplications
of ‘Ali, may God be pleased with him, was, “God
protect me from an enemy who carefully watches me.
If he sees something good in me he conceals it, but
if he sees bad he divulges it.”
If God frustrates their hopes by granting such a
minister success in his efforts to administer the king¬
dom, then they fall back on the tactic of defaming him
before the king, saying, “He is acting independently
of you. You are king only in name,” and other such
stories of the type spread by the unrighteous, which
could find acceptance even among the thinking man
who has not been forewarned, especially in eastern
countries. How then in such a situation would it be
possible for the minister to carry out the adminis¬
tration of the kingdom within the framework of the
public interest, when this entails opposing the man
who is both the judge and the plaintiff? Because of
this second set of obstacles, the aforementioned min¬
ister is obliged either to choose the first situation of
conformity and adopt the ways of dissimulation with
the disastrous consequences resulting in harm to the
homeland, the king, and even to himself, because the
sweetness of agreement with the appetites in a situa¬
tion out of which results destruction of the kingdom
will later be followed by the bitterness of remorse,
or the minister is obliged to resign from government
service once and for all, for even if not for self¬
protection then in order to escape the consequences
of concurring in what would lead to the destruction
of the kingdom, which would necessitate punishment
for the creator and censure of the creature. He may be
permitted to endanger himself for the good of the coun¬
try, but not his honor and reputation. The obedience
to the king and the love of country required of him are
realized only by his striving to advise on how to pro¬
mote the public interest and ward off corruption, if he
is able to do this. If not, then he must withhold his
agreement to anything which would cause harm. Fail¬
ing this, then his agreement, with the knowledge of
the harm which would ensue, is treason.
It is clear from this that kingdoms administered
without regular and well-observed laws under the
supervision of those qualified to loosen and bind will
be limited in their best and their worst to the person
of the king. The extent of success will depend on his
ability and probity. This is shown in the situation of
THE SUREST PATH 47
the European kingdoms in past centuries, before the
establishment of laws, for during that time they had
ministers famous to this day for their complete
knowledge and valor. Yet they were unable to cut the
roots of imperfection growing out of the two types
of royal tyranny referred to above. It should not be
said that the participation of those qualified to loosen
and bind with the princes in all aspects of policy
would be a restriction of the imam's jurisdiction or
of his executive powers. This is an illusion which can
be dispelled by reading Qawanin al-wizara [Ordi¬
nances of Government], by [* Ali ibn Muhammad] al-
Mawardi [Iraq, circa 974—1058]. He has said in ex¬
plaining the delegated vizierate: ‘This occurs when
the imam chooses a vizier to whom he delegates au¬
thority to administer affairs as he sees fit and to
implement them in accordance with his own indepen¬
dent judgment. The authority of this type of vizierate
is not restricted, for God all High has related the
speech of His prophet Moses, upon him be peace,
‘Appoint for me a helper [wazir] from among my
people, my brother Aaron. Increase my strength with
him and cause him to share my task.’ So, if this is
permissible for the prophcthood, it is even more per¬
missible for the imamate.”
Therefore, if the imam’s sharing his power with
the delegated vizierate in the aforementioned man¬
ner is permissible and is not deemed a diminution of
his general executive authority, then his sharing of
power with a group—those qualified to loosen and
bind—in all aspects of policy is even more permis¬
sible, because a group of opinions is more likely to
attain the correct answer. For this reason when ‘Umar
ibn al-Khattab, may God be pleased with him, made
succession to the caliphate a matter of consultation
among six persons, he said, “If you divide two
against four, then decide in favor of the four”—
Sayyid al-Sanad [reference unclear] adds the com¬
mentary that his preference was for the majority,
since their opinion was more likely to be correct—
“and if you are equally divided then decide in favor
of the party which includes ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn
‘Awf [a companion of the Prophet, died circa 652].”
On the other hand, al-Maula Sa‘d al-Din
[Taftazani, 1332-1389] in the Sharh al-‘Aqa’id [Ex¬
planation of “The Creed”] does not even disallow
the sharing of the executive authority of the imam¬
ate. He restricts his disallowing of multiplicity to
whatever might create corruption. As he has stated
in the course of an exposition, “The unauthorized
imamate is the appointment of two independent
imams with obedience owed to each of them sepa¬
rately, for this could create an obligation to obey
conflicting ordinances, but all forms of consultation
with a single imam are authorized.” This is because
the multiplicity of persons in no way contradicts the
unity of the imamate, which is linked to the unity of
commanding and forbidding. Commentators on Sa‘d,
such as ‘Isam al-Din [probably al-Isfara’ini, died
circa 1544] and ‘Abd al-Hakim [possibly Siyalkuti,
died 1657], have approved his statement, and
[Ahmad ibn Musa] al-Khayali [died circa 1457] con¬
firmed it in saying, “This also is to be agreed to.” In
sum, they all recognize the soundness of Sa'd’s state¬
ment. It is thus clear how even more explicitly ac¬
ceptable is consultation in general policy matters in
the sense referred to here, for this is less extensive
than consultation in all executive acts. In the former
type of consultation there is no restriction upon ei¬
ther the general scope or the basic prerogatives of the
imamate, for the view of those qualified to loosen and
bind would be tantamount to that of the imam. It
should also be noted that the imam is the one who
would promulgate any decision, as he is the one hav¬
ing exclusive charge of implementation and direc¬
tion, just as he has exclusive authority other execu¬
tive activities not requiring the association of others,
such as carrying out political and commercial rela¬
tions with foreigners, appointing and dismissing
administrators, execution of all judgments, and other
such executive actions which are the very bases of
the unity of command. Additional evidence is to be
found in the words of the imam Ibn al-‘Arabi, who
said on the subject of special taxes taken from the
people when the treasury is empty, “they should be
taken publicly not secretly, the sums should be spent
justly not appropriated exclusively, and in accor¬
dance with the views of the public, not arbitrarily.”
As an additional element of clarification, let us try
to understand this by means of a parable. The owner
of a large garden, for example, in the management
and care of his trees would not be able to do without
the assistance of helpers knowledgeable about trees
and what causes them to prosper or wither. Now it
might happen that the owner of the garden wanted
to cut some of the branches of his trees, believing that
would strengthen the roots and increase the fruit, but
his helpers disagreed, knowing from the basic prin¬
ciples of cultivation that pruning at that time would
kill the tree at the roots. In such circumstances, to
48 Khayr al-Din
obstruct the owner’s wish could not be considered a
restriction on the scope of his supervision or his com¬
plete executive authority in his garden. Or the help¬
ers might attempt to stop the owner in what he wanted
to do because of the Holy Law. For example, if the
owner should wish to sell the fruit before it was ripe,
they would indicate to him that such action would
displease the Creator of the trees, who is the true
owner. This might oblige him to accept their advice
in these two cases; but if not, the blame would fall
upon him, and he would deserve to be deprived of
the garden. Can it be argued that this was a restric¬
tion on the owner of the garden, when giving him his
way would have been contrary to divine wisdom that
the production of the world and the exploitation of
the earth is for the sons of Adam? It is true that the
yield from the garden belongs to its owner, but
whether it belongs to him, to someone else, or even
if his position was—as ‘Umar, may God be pleased
with him, said—like that of the orphan’s guardian,
one should not think that such action is a restriction
upon the owner. It is well known that the imam’s
freedom of action concerning the condition of his
subjects does not extend beyond the limits of the
public interest. Furthering the interests of the umma
and managing its policies are matters which do not
come easily to everyone. In such circumstances, to
obstruct his will when he does something beyond the
limits of permissible action is, as we have explained,
a means of liberation from the unsoundness of that
argument. Thus, there can be no prohibition on the
type of consultation which has already been de¬
scribed. Whoever gives due attention to the matter
of necessity, as Shaykh Ibn al-‘Arabi has done (for
he is our source in all that we have previously stated),
would not hesitate to assert that this is necessary
especially in these times characterized by a dearth of
knowledge and an abundance of tyranny. In a con¬
versation I had with a European notable, I was prais¬
ing at length their king and mentioning his great
knowledge of political fundamentals, when he re¬
plied that the king by his very nature and intelligence
was incapable of acting in the wrong manner. “Then
why,” I asked, “are you so sparing in granting him
freedom of action in government, and why do you
wish to participate with him in the affairs of the king¬
dom, for you concede that given his qualities no such
participation is needed?” He replied, “Who will guar¬
antee to us that he and his descendants after him shall
remain upright?”
Since what we have been presenting on this subject
indicates that liberty is the basis of the great devel¬
opment of knowledge and civilization in the Euro¬
pean kingdoms, we believe it imperative to demon¬
strate the meaning of liberty in actual practice, in
order to avert any possible ambiguity.
The expression “liberty” is used by Europeans in
two senses. One is called “personal liberty.” This is
the individual’s complete freedom of action over
one’s self and property, and the protection of one’s
person, honor, and wealth. Each is equal before the
law to others of the race, so that no individuals need
fear encroachment upon their person nor any of their
other rights. They would not be prosecuted for any¬
thing not provided for in the laws of the land, duly
determined before the courts. In general, the laws
bind both the rulers and the subjects. Liberty in this
sense exists in all the European countries except the
Papal State and the Muscovite state, for these two are
despotisms. Although these two possess established
laws, this is not enough to protect the rights of the
umma , for the influence of those laws depends on the
will of the king.
The second sense of liberty is political liberty,
which is the demand of the subjects to participate in
the politics of the kingdom and to discuss the best
course of action. This is similar to what the second
caliph, ‘Umar ibn al-Khaltab, may God be pleased
with him, referred to in saying, “Whoever among you
sees any crookedness, then let him set it straight,”
meaning any deviation in his conduct or governance
of the umma.
Since the granting of liberty in this sense to all the
people is most likely to cause a divergence of views
and result in confusion, the people instead elect from
among those possessing knowledge and virtue a
group called by the Europeans the Chamber of Gen¬
eral Deputies. We would call them those qualified to
loosen and bind, even though this [latter] group is not
elected by the people. This is because the avoidance
of the reprehensible in our shari ‘a is in the category
of those responsibilities which can be delegated. If
some members of the community assume the respon¬
sibility, then the obligation is removed from the rest
of the community. When such a group is so desig¬
nated, this responsibility becomes a strictly pre¬
scribed obligation upon them.
The Chamber of Deputies is to be found in all
European kingdoms except the Papal State and Rus¬
sia. The chamber has the right to discuss in the pres-
THE SUREST PATH 49
ence of the ministers and other statesmen which lines
of state policy seem to be beneficial or the contrary,
and other such matters affecting the public interest,
as will be seen.
In addition to this there remains to the public some¬
thing else which is called freedom of the press, that
is, people cannot be prevented from writing what
seems to them to be in the public interest, in books or
newspapers which can be read by the public. Or they
can present their views to the state or the chambers,
even if this includes opposition to the state’s policy.
In this matter there are differences among the
European states. There are those who have obtained
this second liberty with the first, thus achieving ab¬
solute liberty. In others, the rulers have granted the
people the second liberty subject to important con¬
ditions, for these governments have refused their
subjects rights which it would be easy to bestow upon
subjects of other states. This is because the conditions
of kingdoms vary according to the aims of their sub¬
jects. Some subjects resist their kings only in order
to have the right of opposing the state if it turns aside
from the straight path, and to draw it toward a policy
of benefit to the kingdom. In such circumstances it
is easy for kings to grant complete liberty, because
the ruler and the subjects share the same aim regard¬
ing the public interest.
There are those subjects who suppose that the
reason for the struggle is to exacerbate factionalism
and fanaticism, so that the subjects are divided into
parties, with each seeking the policy which it believes
most beneficial for the kingdom. Some believe the
state should be a republic. Some would choose the
monarch from a different family than the one favored
by others. This causes the dynasty to believe that the
opposition of the various parties, even if it appears
to be confined to returning the state to the paths of
public interest, actually hides an ulterior motive. As
a result of this belief, some kings deem it permissible
to abstain from granting complete liberty. This leads
to the consequences already mentioned.
One of the duties in kingdoms that have granted
liberty, even if only personal liberty, is that its sub¬
jects should repay having received this blessing by
working to bring about its possible consequences and
benefits. They can do this by concerning themselves
with the various branches of knowledge and all kinds
of industries, which can be reduced to four basic
categories: agriculture, commerce, physical work,
and intellectual activity. These four categories are the
foundation of material well-being, which causes the
growth of human ambition, and are a complement to
liberty, which is based on justice and the sound or¬
ganization of society.
Artisans, for example, must feel secure against
being despoiled of any of the fruits of their labor or
hampered in certain aspects of their work. What does
it profit a people to have fertile lands with bountiful
crops if the sowers cannot realize the harvest of what
they have planted? Who then will venture to sow it?
Because of the faint hope of the people in many lands
of Asia and Africa, you find the most fertile fields
uncultivated and neglected. There can be no doubt
that the hostile action against property cuts off hopes,
and with the severance of hope comes the severance
of activities, until finally destitution becomes so per¬
vasive that it leads to annihilation.
Among the most important things the Europeans
have gathered from the lofty tree of liberty are the
improvements in communications by means of rail¬
roads, support for commercial societies, and the at¬
tention given to technical training. By means of the
railroads, products can be imported from distant
lands quickly enough to be useful, whereas their
importation was formerly impossible. They would
have spoiled en route or the freight costs would have
been several times the value of the goods.
With these societies the circulation of capital is
expanded, profits increase accordingly, and wealth
is put into the hands of the most proficient who can
cause it to increase.
Through technical training wealth gains the nec¬
essary means of productive activity from among the
ranks of those without capital. We have seen that the
countries which have progressed to the highest ranks
of prosperity are those having established the roots of
liberty and the constitution, synonymous with politi¬
cal tanzimat. Their peoples have reaped its benefits by
directing their efforts to the interests of the world in
which they live. One of the benefits of liberty is com¬
plete control over the conduct of commerce. If people
lose the assurance that their property will be protected,
they are compelled to hide it. Then it becomes impos¬
sible for them to put it into circulation.
In general, if liberty is lost in the kingdom, then
comfort and wealth will disappear, and poverty and
high prices will overwhelm its peoples. Their percep¬
tiveness and zeal will be weakened, as both logic and
experience reveal.
3
Muhammad ‘Abduh
Laws Should Change in Accordance
with the Conditions of Nations
and The Theology of Unity
Muhammad ‘Abduh (Egypt, 1849-1905) was, along with his mentor Sayyid Jamal al-Din
al-Afghani (see chapter I I), the most prominent figure of modernist Islam. Born to a
peasant family of modest means in the Egyptian Delta, he received a traditional Islamic
education in his hometown, then continued his education at the celebrated al-Azhar semi¬
nary. During Afghani's sojourn in Egypt (1871-1879), 'Abduh became closely associated
with him and his reformist ideas. In 1882, ‘Abduh was exiled to Beirut for his association
with the 'Urabi revolt. In 1884, he joined Afghani in Paris, where they produced the famed
journal al-‘Urwa al-wuthqa (The Strongest Link), which agitated against imperialism and called
for Islamic reform and unity. 'Abduh returned to Beirut, where he taught for several years
before being pardoned by the Egyptian ruler. Returning to Egypt, he served as a judge and
then as Egypt's leading religious official, al-Azhar administrative board member and Egypt's
Legislative Council member. ‘Abduh devised programs for the reform of the educational
system, the Arabic language, and the education of girls, and labored to introduce reforms
in al-Azhar, the religious endowment administration, and the court system. 'Abduh's influ¬
ence extended beyond Egypt, inspiring reformists throughout the Islamic world, The first
piece presented here makes a case for legal reform; the second piece highlights the role of
reason in understanding religion and the sharia . Through a return to the fundamental sources
of Islam, 'Abduh hoped to liberate the Muslim mind from traditional patterns of stagna¬
tion, enabling Muslims to address the requirements of modernity. 1
Laws Should Change in Accordance with
the Conditions of Nations
The First Creator, God the Sublime, entrusted to
humanity two powers, one practical and one theoreti¬
cal, so that through them we might attain the perfec¬
tion intended for us. God also bound one of them to
the other, making the perfection of the first depen¬
dent on the perfection of the second. Humanity is thus
Muhammad ‘Abduh, “Ikhtilaf al-qawanin bi-ikhtilaf ahwal
al-umam” (Laws Should Change in Accordance with the Con¬
ditions of Nations), pp. 309-315 in al-A‘mal al-kamila (The
Complete Works), ed. Muhammad ‘Imara (Beirut, Lebanon:
Mu’assasat al-‘Arabiyyali al-Dirasat wa al-Nashr, 1972); The
Theology of Unity (Risalat al-tawhid), translated from Ara¬
bic by Ishaq Masa’ad and Kenneth Cragg (London: Allen &
Unwin, 1966), pp. 29-40, 151-154, reprinted by permission
of HarperCollins Publishers. Translation of first piece from
Arabic by Devin Stewart. First published in 1881 and 1897,
respectively. Introduction by Emad Eldin Shahin.
innately disposed to seek out a theoretical under¬
standing and to discover the true state of matters
before he begins any practical work, for he under¬
takes no task unless the results thereof induce him
to do so. Now, not every activity produces the results
desired; indeed, in order to do so, it must be accom¬
plished in a particular fashion. Certainly, the ability
to envision results and knowledge of the methods
involved in activities are among those things that
depend on the capacity for rational inquiry. If this
1. Charles C. Adams, Islam and Modernism in Egypt: A
Study of the Modern Reform Movement Inaugurated by
Muhammad 'Abduh (London: Oxford University Press, 1933);
Osman Amin, Muhammad ‘Abduh (Washington, D.C.: Ameri¬
can Council for Learned Societies, 1953); Malcolm H. Kerr,
Islamic Reform: The Political and Legal Theories of Muhammad
‘Abduh and Rashid Rida (Berkeley: University of California
Press, 1966); Ahmed Amin, Zu'ama’ al-islah ft al-‘asr al-
hadith (The Leaders of Reform in the Modern Era) (Cairo.
Egypt: Maktabat al-Nahda al-Masriyya, 1979), pp. 302-369.
50
LAWS SHOULD CHANGE AND THE THEOLOGY OF UNITY 5 I
capacity is fully developed, then work turns out in
the best fashion, the benefit that results is greater, and
the outcome is more complete.
For this reason, all humans are bent on rounding
out their theoretical knowledge, first and in particu¬
lar so that through it they might be guided to the
proper methods for the work they perform in order
to lead a full life. They also do so in order to distin¬
guish results according to their relative benefits, so
that they might put each result opposite a particular
task, arranged in a known manner, beginning with
that which produces benefits most quickly, is accom¬
plished most easily, and is set forth most reliably.
Human knowledge is in effect a collection of rules
about useful benefits, by which people organize the
methods of work that lead to those benefits, so that
they will not stumble along their path and confuse
the beneficial with the harmful, thus encountering
hardship and suffering at the hands of misfortune.
Since the conditions of nations depend on their
collective stores of information, and the two are related
in terms of cause and effect, each nation adopts rules
for its activities and chooses laws for its circumstances
in accordance with its power of theoretical investiga¬
tion and its level of thought. At no time does it con¬
tradict the customs and traditional values that its natu¬
ral disposition has established, unless fortune provides
it the chance to ascend to a higher level of rational
examination and a more elevated plane of thought.
Because laws are the basis of activities organized
properly to produce manifest benefits, the results of
theoretical inquiry, and the outcome of intellectual
investigation, the laws of each nation correspond to
its level in understanding. Laws vary in accordance
with nations’ varying levels of knowledge, or the lack
thereof.
It is not permissible, therefore, to apply the law of
one group of people to another group who differ from
and surpass the first in level of understanding, because
the law will not suit their state of thinking and will not
match their customs and traditional habits. Otherwise,
order among the second group will be disturbed, their
path toward good sense will be obscured, and the road
to understanding will be closed before them. They will
consider the correct to be invalid and the right to be
wrong. They will pervert the application of these laws,
change them, and put others in their place, so that what
is a cure for others will become a disease for them. This
is because of short-sightedness on their part and ig¬
norance of what these laws were intended to accom¬
plish, what motivated them, and what made them nec¬
essary. Need is the guiding master, and the first
teacher. When people properly recognize need, they
strive to fulfill it. They are restricted by it, and do not
go against its dictates and prescriptions. If the institu¬
tion of laws within a nation is motivated by its need
for them, it will not contravene them simply because
of circumstances. However, people who were not in¬
duced by need to institute such laws do not consider
them among life’s fundamental necessities. They are
not to be blamed for discarding such laws, and de¬
manding that they abide by such laws would impose
an impossibly difficult obligation. It is more appropri¬
ate for them to learn first what the need is, so that they
might be equal with others in their level of knowledge
and united with them in the consequences thereof.
It has been the custom of legislators in every age,
in instituting laws, to take into account the level of
intelligence of those for whom laws are to be insti¬
tuted, so that the people will not find them unclear,
incomprehensible, or devoid of discernible purpose.
[Legislators have also customarily] paid full atten¬
tion to customs and traditional habits. In establish¬
ing laws, they do not deviate from the harshness or
leniency that customs and traditional habits require.
A little reprimand suffices and the threat of a light
punishment restrains many a group of people whose
temperaments are readily compliant, whose spirits are
noble, and whose senses are quick to be affected.
Such people should have prescribed for them laws
that suit their conditions. They should not be bur¬
dened with severe laws, for they will be harmed by
these laws, like someone who takes more than the
proper dose of medicine.
For example, suppose that one of these people we
have described did something that required punish¬
ment. If imprisonment, for him, troubles his tempera¬
ment and severely pains his spirit, because of his
pride and delicate sensibility, and if the spirits of his
clan and the inhabitants of his town cannot bear that
someone should say “So-and-so was imprisoned for
such-and-such a crime,” the occurrence of such a
thing to one of them would be a very great check
against perpetrating the crime he committed. The
sentencing of this criminal, then, to a more severe
punishment, such as banishment, exile, or hard, hu¬
miliating labor, would be a clear injustice. It might
cause his death soon thereafter, or produce long-
lasting dejection and perennial rancor in the hearts
of his folk and clan, due to their certainty that the
52 Muhammad ‘Abduh
ruling was wrong and the judge unjust. This would
only lead, in the long run, to the fires of rebellion
being lit and the heat of hatred flaming up among
them. Either they would be destined to commit evil
acts or else their spirits would be extinguished, their
temperaments humiliated, and their pride utterly
crushed, a miserable end indeed.
Many a nation has raised its members on coarse¬
ness and the shunning of delicacy. Their insides are
filled with vileness and baseness, and their spirits are
far from honorable. Such people are only deterred
from perpetrating offenses or restrained from the
pursuit of immoral aims by harsh laws based on se¬
vere punishments. It is a clear mistake to sentence a
guilty party from among such a group to imprison¬
ment, for example, since his spirit considers even
harsher punishments to be trifling. The purpose of
instituting laws is to prevent that which disturbs or¬
der, disrupts the structure of society, harms individual
interests, and detracts from public welfare. If laws do
not serve this purpose, then they are but empty bur¬
dens thrown on the shoulders of the people. Indeed,
we should see them as merely widening the sphere
of corruption and increasing instances of injustice.
As an example of what we have just stated, we
may cite the former state of our own land. Some time
ago, Egypt’s inhabitants were barbarians who did not
know what was good for themselves, for ignorance
had a tight hold on them in that era. They did not pay
attention to agriculture, despite the availability of the
necessary means for it and the suitability of the soil.
Landowners did not know the value of the land they
owned. They continually wished that their properties
would be transferred to someone else, so that they
would not be burdened with paying the taxes that the
government had imposed on them. They avoided
tarrying in town long enough for the hands of the
governors to grab them. Villagers left and settled in
other villages, fearing that they could not survive
through farming and seeking better ways to accumu¬
late wealth and fortune. The government was thus
compelled to force villagers to take possession of the
land and farm it, instituting harsh laws for violators,
including provisions for severe punishment. When
the time came for the government to demand the
royal taxes, the prisons filled up with those left be¬
hind by the others who had fled their villages, and
the market for whips became brisk. It appeared that
everyone had either fled, been imprisoned, or ached
from beatings. The country regularly withered and
flourished at particular times of the year, without
variation. It continued in this sorry state for a long
time, until the populace’s spirits became attached to
work, and agriculture was made easy for them. Egypt
entered a new stage of development as a result of
measures which made the methods of farming easier
and got the populace to remain in their villages. They
adopted a unified plan for the farming of their lands
and were no longer overly concerned with govern¬
ment taxes, because they had begun to learn the im¬
portance of agriculture, taking it seriously and com¬
peting in their crop yields. So the laws that the
government had adopted to prevent farmers from
fleeing, neglecting to work the land, and defaulting
on the submission of taxes changed to a certain ex¬
tent. Then various oppressive hands had successive
control over them for quite a long period, but they
remained settled in their properties. They grew tired
of abuse, and their spirits longed for a just law by
which the matter of their tax payments would be put
in order. The hand of divine Providence brought to
them, through the government of Tawfiq [Egyptian
ruler, 1879-1892], someone who established for
them a just law concerning this issue. With this new
law, Egypt entered a new era, and the sound of the
whip was removed from among its people. The pun¬
ishment for falling behind in the payment of taxes
was changed so as not to debase a person’s honor,
and public welfare was regulated according to laws
that do not go against the inclinations of the popu¬
lace, in a fashion different from that followed in ear¬
lier laws. This was a consequence of the difference
between the two conditions and the change in the two
inclinations, former and latter. If the punishment for
falling in arrears in earlier times had been seizure of
the owner’s land, then falling in arrears would have
been their dearest wish, so that they could be relieved
of writing their names in the landowners’ register.
This recompense would have been a reward for them,
in actuality, and not a punishment, but now it has
become the most severe punishment.
The time has come for our government to turn its
consideration to the laws of our courts, to make them
appropriate for present conditions, choosing laws that
are not difficult to understand, whose texts do not
suggest multiple interpretations. The articles of the
new law should not be the sort of general rules whose
verdicts are meant to apply to various punishments
for many diverse crimes. This will prevent the laws
themselves from serving as a pretext for those who
LAWS SHOULD CHANGE AND THE THEOLOGY OF UNITY 53
harbor immoral designs to play with people’s rights
as they wish. [We urge this] while recognizing the
fact that those who exercise control over the law do
not have the status of legislators able to derive the
rulings which apply to the actual situations at hand
from general rules or from texts which support in¬
terpretations contrary to their evident meaning.
Moreover, those of us who have legitimate claims
are not beyond entertaining invalid suspicions and
conjectures. We might suspect someone who is in¬
nocent of error or treachery, while the actual articles
of the law do not provide a clear ruling and their texts
are not transparent. This leads to repeated appeals for
judicial inquiry: The matter takes a long time, the
welfare of the people is obstructed, expenses in¬
crease, resentments grow strong, and the gates of
corruption are flung wide open, given an abundance
of legal cases and disputes, as is the case in our land
at present. It is therefore necessary that the articles
of the law be written explicitly, indicate rulings in a
straightforward manner, apply to all possible cases,
be set forth in logical categories, and use simple lin¬
guistic constructions.
The laws that have been in common use in our land
up to now—in addition to being insufficient, too gen¬
eral, and written in an unclear style—are not precise
and well organized, nor are they known by the people.
Certain laws are known as “The Imperial Law,” some
laws are named “Regulations,” some are called “Di¬
rectives of the Ministry of Justice,” some are called
“Decisions of the Privy Council,” others “Proclama¬
tions of Legal Rulings,” some “The Royal Decree is¬
sued on such-and-such a date,” and so on ad infini¬
tum. How could this scattered mess reasonably serve
as a law by which the people should abide? Even if
they were informed of the law, it would remain incon¬
ceivable to them, because it is foreign to their condi¬
tions and beyond their capacity to understand.
It is necessary to reform this obvious flaw in our
legal system, which has deprived people of their rights
and jeopardized security. It behooves us to do this
quickly and avoid wasting time in pointless discus¬
sions. The laws must fulfill all of the necessary restric¬
tions and conditions, and should refer us back neither
to the “Proclamations” nor to the “Regulations.” This
should facilitate the determination of legal rulings and
make them conform with the exigencies of the present
situation. The laws should suit the conditions of the
populace and their level of comprehension, enabling
them to understand the laws and abide by their require¬
ments, each one according to his own situation. Oth¬
erwise, they will be nothing but ink on paper.
Scholars and political leaders of both ancient and
modem times have long recognized that legislators
and institutors of laws must always take into account
customs and traditional habits in order to establish
laws in a just and beneficial manner. Indeed, the
conditions of nations are themselves the hue legis¬
lator, the wise, regulating guide. The governing
power is actually dependent on the capacities of its
subjects; the former does not take a single step un¬
less induced to do so by the latter. True, we do not
deny that the preparation of means and measures
depends on the governing power. The government
imposes these things on its subjects willy-nilly, but
these impositions must be in accordance with the
capacity of those ruled. Changes in the form of gov¬
ernment and the replacement of its laws depend on
the citizenry’s legitimate claims, and these are tan¬
tamount to the condition of the populace. The shift
of the government of France, for example, from an
absolute monarchy to a restricted monarchy, then to
a free republic, did not occur by the will of those in
authority alone. Rather, the strongest contributing
factors were the conditions of the people, the increase
in their level of thought, and their new awareness of
the need to ascend to a state higher than their present
one. By learning what their true obligations were,
they were able to overcome all the outside forces that
had stood between them and the attainment of their
desires. Moreover, they only arrived at this noble
goal after breaking through the obstacles that stood
before them; otherwise, they could not have reached
their goal or attained their desire.
Since the identification of the proper means and
measures presents a difficult puzzle for human intel¬
ligence and discernment, it is extremely difficult to
learn and acquire them in their essential forms. It
often occurs that a certain group of people think
themselves prepared to move to a higher level of civi¬
lization and legal organization, but the matter is not
as they had imagined, so they end up regressing to a
less desirable state. While they set out to make leg¬
islation and participation in the establishment of laws
free and open to all, they are not safe from the machi¬
nations of special interests, nor do they possess the
means necessary to prepare them for such an under¬
taking. The disease of discord spreads rapidly
through their collective body, and the disorder of
obstinacy pursues them relentlessly. They fail to ar-
54 Muhammad 'Abduh
rive at correct decisions, settle on firm opinions, and
give decisive verdicts. They spend ages in pointless
argument, and so lose the benefits of decisive action
and squander their own welfare. They are thus aptly
described by the proverb, “He who hastens some¬
thing on before its time, will be punished by being
deprived of it.” In sum, the form of civil rule for a
nation is nothing but a reflection of the capacities that
its members have acquired, including their familiar
practices and the customs on which they have been
raised. During the course of a nation’s ascent or de¬
scent, its laws are inseparable from these capacities,
no matter how much its classes change or its affairs
vary. This is what makes intelligent people, when
they desire to establish a sound system to regulate
the nation’s social life, strive first to change the
people’s capacities and traditional habits, placing
genuine education before all else in order to be able
to attain this goal. Indeed, they include in the gov¬
ernmental laws themselves chapters and sections that
serve to regulate customary habits and preserve meri¬
torious aptitudes, guide individuals in their activities
and their conduct, so that their work may be trans¬
formed from a burden to a custom and natural dis¬
position. In this way, morals may become virtuous
and customs excellent, and the nation may follow the
path of rectitude toward the best ultimate goal.
The Theology of Unity
The theology of unity ( tawhid ) is the science that
studies the being and attributes of God, the essential
and the possible affirmations about Him, as well as
the negations that are necessary to make relating to
Him. It deals also with the apostles and the authen¬
ticity of their message and treats of their essential and
appropriate qualities and of what is incompatibly
associated with them.
The original meaning of tawhid is the belief that
God is one in inalienable divinity. Thus the whole
science of theology is named from the most impor¬
tant of its parts, namely the demonstration of the
unity of God in Himself and in the act of creation.
From Him alone all being derives and in Him alone
every purpose comes to its term. Unity was the great
aim of the mission of the Prophet Muhammad, the
blessing and peace of God be upon him. This is en¬
tirely evident from the verses of the mighty Qur’an,
as will fully appear below.
The doctrine of unity could equally well be called
scholastic theology. One reason for this lies in the
fact that the chief point of debate at issue between
the learned of the early centuries was whether the
Qur’anic word was created or preexistent. Another
may lie in the fact that theology is built on rational
demonstration as alleged by each theologian in his
spoken case. For in their rationality they only occa¬
sionally appealed to dogmatic tradition ( naql ) and
then only after establishing the first principles from
which they went on yet again to further deductions,
like branches of the same stem. The name may per¬
haps also be credited to the fact that these scholastic
methods of proof in theology were comparable to
those of logic in its procedures of argument within
the speculative sciences. So kalam, or scholastic the¬
ology, was used as a term in preference to logic, to
denote the distinction between the two, with their
identical procedures but differing subject matter.
This branch of science, dogmatic theology and
prophetic interpretation, was known among the nations
before Islam. There were in every people custodians
of religion concerned with its protection and propa¬
gation, of which the first prerequisite is expression.
They had, however, little recourse to rational judgment
in their custody of belief. They rarely relied for their
ideas and dogmas on the nature of existence or the laws
of the universe. Indeed there is an almost total con¬
trast between the intellectual cut and thrust of science
and the forms of religious persuasion and assurance
of heart. Oftentimes religion on the authority of its own
leaders was the avowed enemy of reason, and all its
works. Theology consisted for the most part of intri¬
cate subtleties and credulous admiration of miracles,
with free play to the imagination—a situation famil¬
iar enough to those acquainted at all with the condi¬
tion of the world before the coming of Islam.
The Qur’an came and took religion by a new road,
untrodden by the previous Scriptures, a road appro¬
priate and feasible alike to the contemporaries of the
revelation and to their successors. The proof of the
prophethood of Muhammad was quite a different
matter from that of earlier prophecies. It rested its
case on a quality of eloquence, belonging even to the
shortest chapter of it, quite beyond the competence
of the rhetoricians to reproduce, though in his
recipience of the revelation he was simply a man. The
Book gives us all that God permits us, or is essential
for us, to know about His attributes. But it does not
require our acceptance of its contents simply on the
LAWS SHOULD CHANGE AND THE THEOLOGY OF UNITY 55
ground of its own statement of them. On the contrary,
it offers arguments and evidence. It addressed itself
to the opposing schools and carried its attacks with
spirited substantiation. It spoke to the rational mind
and alerted the intelligence. It set out the order in the
universe, the principles and certitudes within it, and
required a lively scrutiny of them that the mind might
thus be sure of the validity of its claims and message.
Even in relation of the narratives of the past, it pro¬
ceeded on the conviction that the created order fol¬
lows invariable laws, as the Qur’an says: “Such was
the way of God in days gone by and you will find it
does not change.” [Sura 48, Verse 23] And again:
“God does not change a people’s case until they
change their own disposition.” [Sura 13, Verse 11]
“. .. the shape of religious man as God has made him.
There is no altering the creation of God.” [Sura 30,
Verse 30] Even in the realm of the moral it relies on
evidence: “Requite evil with good and your worst
enemy will become your dearest friend.” [Sura 41,
Verse 34] Thus for the first time in a revealed Scrip¬
ture, reason finds its brotherly place. So plain is the
point that no elucidation is required.
Saving those who give place to neither reason nor
faith, all Muslims are of one mind in the conviction
that there are many things in religion which can only
be believed by the way of reason, such as the knowl¬
edge of God’s existence, of His power to send mes¬
sengers, of His knowledge of the content of their in¬
spiration, of His will to give them particular messages,
and, with these, many consequent points relating to
the comprehension and evidence of prophetic mission.
So Muslims are of one mind that though there may be
in religion that which transcends the understanding,
there is nothing which reason finds impossible.
The Qur’an describes the attributes of God, by and
large, with a far surer accent of transcendence than the
earlier religions. Nevertheless, there are several human
attributes, which, in name or form, are made compa¬
rable, such as power, choice, hearing, and seeing. In
what is ascribed to God we find points that have coun¬
terparts in man, like taking one’s seat upon a throne,
and like the face and the hands. The Qur’an deals at
length with predestination and human free will, and
takes controversial issue with those who exaggerate
on both sides of this theme. It affirms the reward of
good deeds and the retribution of evil deeds and leaves
the recompense of approbation and punishment to the
arbitrament of God. In this introduction there is no
need to expatiate further on similar topics.
This Qur’anic esteem for the rational judgment,
together with the use of parables in the allegorical
or ambiguous passages in the revealed text, gave
great scope to alert intelligences, therefore so inas¬
much as the appeal of this religion to reason in the
study of created things was in no way limited or
hedged about with conditions. For it knew that every
sound study would conduce to belief in God, as
Qur’anically depicted. So it had no need of either
excessive abstraction or over-rigorous definition.
The Prophet’s day passed—he who was men’s
recourse in perplexity and their lamp in the darkness
of doubt. His two immediate successors in the caliph¬
ate [Abu Bakr and ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab, 632-634
and 634-644] devoted their span of life to repelling
his foes and ensuring the unity of the Muslims. Men
had little leisure at that time for critical discussion
of the basis of their beliefs. What few differences
there were they took to the two caliphs, and the ca¬
liph gave his decision, after consultation, if neces¬
sary, with the available men of insight. These issues,
for the most part, had to do with branches of law, not
with the principles of dogma. Under those two ca¬
liphs, men understood the Book in its meaning and
allusions. They believed in the transcendence of God
and refrained from debate about the implications of
passages involving human comparisons. They did
not go beyond what was indicated by the literal mean¬
ing of the words.
So the case remained until the events which re¬
sulted in the death of the third caliph [‘Uthman in
656]—a tragedy which did irreparable damage to the
structure of the caliphate and brutally diverted Islam
and the Muslim people from their right and proper
course. Only the Qur'an remained unimpaired in its
continuity. As God said: “It is We who have sent down
the Reminder and We truly preserve it.” [Sura 15,
Verse 9] And thus the way was open for man to trans¬
gress the proper bounds of religion. The caliph had
been killed with no legal judgment and thus the popu¬
lar mind was made to feel there could be free rein to
passion in the thoughts of those who had not truly
allowed the faith to rule in their hearts. “Lawless an¬
ger had possessed many of the very exponents of pi¬
ous religion. Both worldlings and zealots together had
overborne the steadfast people and set in motion a train
of consequences they could only deplore.
Among the actors in that crisis of disloyalty was
‘Abdullah Ibn Saba’ [7 th century, reputed founder of
Shi‘ism], a Jew who had embraced Islam and an
56 Muhammad ‘Abduh
excessive admirer of ‘Ali [ibn Abi Talib, son-in-law
and fourth successor of the Prophet, reigned 656-
661] (whose face God honor) to the point of assert¬
ing that God indwelt him. Ibn Saba' claimed that ‘Ali
was the rightful caliph and rebelled against ‘Uthman,
who exiled him. He went to Basra where he propa¬
gated his seditious views. Evicted from there, he went
to Kufa, taking his poison with him, and thence to
Damascus, where he failed to find the support he
wanted. He proceeded to Egypt where he did find
collaborators with the dire consequences we know.
In the time of ‘Ali, when his school showed its head
again, he was exiled to Mada’in. His ideas spawned
a lot of later heresies.
Events took their subsequent course. Some of
those who had pledged allegiance to the fourth ca¬
liph broke their fealty. Civil war ensued, issuing in
the hegemony of the Umayyads [reigned 661-750].
But the community had been sundered and its bonds
of unity broken. Rival schools of thought about the
caliphate developed and were propagated in partisan¬
ship, each striving by word and act to gain the better
over its adversary, This in turn gave rise to forgeries
of traditions and interpretation, and the sectarian
excess brought sharp divisions into Khawarij [ex¬
treme pietists], Shi‘a [supporters of hereditary suc¬
cession of the Prophet], and moderates. The Khawarij
went so far as to declare their opponents infidels and
to demand a republican form of government. For a
long time they maintained their “excommunication”
of those who resisted them, until after much fight¬
ing that cost many Muslim lives their cause grew
weak. They fled into remoter parts but continued their
seditious activities. A remnant of them survives to
the present in certain areas of Africa and of the Ara¬
bian peninsula. The Shi‘as carried their heresy to the
point of exalting ‘Ali or some of his descendants to
divine or near-divine status, with widespread conse¬
quences in the field of dogma.
These developments, however, did not halt the
propagation of Islam and did not deprive the areas
remote from the center of controversy of the light of
the Qur’an. People came into Islam in droves—Per¬
sians, Syrians and their neighbors, Egyptians and
Africans, and others in their train. Freed from the
necessity of defending the temporal power of Islam,
great numbers were ready to busy themselves with
the first principles of belief and law, in pursuance of
the Qur’an’s guidance. In this task, they gave due
place to the delivered tradition without neglecting the
proud role of reason or overlooking the intellect. Men
of sincere integrity took to the vocation of knowledge
and education, the most famous of them being Hasan
al-Basri [642-728], He had a school in Basra to
which students came from every part, and various
questions were examined. People of all religious
persuasions had come into Islam without knowing it
inwardly, but carrying with them into it their exist¬
ing notions, seeking some kind of mediating com¬
promise between the old and the Islamic. So after the
tempests of sedition came the tensions of doubt.
Every opinion-monger took his stand upon the lib¬
erty of thought the Qur’an enjoined. The newcom¬
ers asserted their right to an equal stake with the
existing authorities, and schisms raised their heads
among the Muslims.
The first theme of contention to arise was that of
will—man’s independence in willing and doing and
choosing, and the question of the supreme sin unre¬
pented of. Wasil ibn ‘Ata’ [founder of Mu’tazilism,
died 748] and his [spiritual] master, Hasan al-Basri,
differed on this issue and the former broke away,
teaching according to his own independent lights.
Many of the first Muslim masters, including Hasan
al-Basri, or so it is alleged, were of the view that
man truly has choice in the deeds which proceed
from his knowledge and will. So they opposed the
school of jabr, or determinism, which held that man
in his volitional activity is like the branches of a tree
swaying necessarily. Throughout the period of the
rule of the sons of Marwan [Umayyad caliph, died
685], no effort was made to regulate the issue or to
get people back to first principles and bring them
to a common position. Individual idiosyncrasy had
free play, though ‘Umar ibn ‘Abd al-‘Aziz [caliph,
682-720] gave directions to [Muhammad ibn Mus¬
lim] al-Zuhri [died 741] to record the traditions he
had come by, and he was the first tradition-collector.
These two problems, however, were not all. Con¬
troversy developed also over the question whether
the real attributes of God should be posited of the
divine essence or not. There was also the question
of reason and its competence to know all religious
principles, even the ramifications of law and matters
pertaining to worship, which some espoused even to
the point of excessive pleading of the Qur'anic text.
Others limited the writ of reason to the first prin¬
ciples, as explained above. Others again—a minor¬
ity—in a spirit of contention against the first group,
totally repudiated reason and thus went counter to the
LAWS SHOULD CHANGE AND THE THEOLOGY OF UNITY 57
Qur'an itself. Opinions on the caliphs and the caliph¬
ate marched with those on matters of doctrine, as if
they were an integral part of Islamic dogma.
With the disciples of Wasil the paths diverged
further. For they had recourse to drawing congenial
ideas from the Greeks. They had the idea that it was
a work of piety to establish dogma by scientific cor¬
roboration, without discriminating, however, be¬
tween what went back to rational first principles and
what was merely a figment of the imagination. So
they mingled with the tenets of religion what had no
valid rational applicability. They persisted on this
tack until their sects multiplied apace. The rule of the
‘Abbasids [caliphs, 750-1258], then in the prime of
power, helped them and their views prevailed. Their
learned scholars began to write books. Whereupon
the adherents of the schools of the early masters took
up their challenge, sustained by the power of con¬
viction, though lacking the support of the rulers.
The early ‘Abbasids knew the extent of their debt
to the Persians for the successful establishment of
their power and the overthrow of the Umayyad state.
They relied strongly on Persian collaboration and
brought them into high positions among their min¬
isters and retainers. Many of them thus came into
authority without any part or lot in Islam religiously,
including Manichee sectaries and Yazidis, and other
Persian persuasions, as well as utterly irreligious
people. They began to disseminate their opinions and
by attitude and utterance induced those to whom their
views were congenial to accept their direction. Athe¬
ism emerged, and views inimical to belief in God
became rife, to the point that [Abu Ja‘far] al-Mansur
[caliph, reigned 754—775] ordered the issue of books
exposing their errors and negating their claims.
At this juncture the science of theology was still a
young plant, a still partly reared edifice. Technical
theology took its point of departure from its perpetual
principle, namely the study of the created order, within
the terms laid down by the Qur’an. There ensued here
the dispute over the createdness or uncreatedness
of the Qur’an. Several of the ‘ Abbasid caliphs adopted
the dogma of the Qur’an’s being created, while a
considerable number of those who held to the plain
sense of the Qur’an and the sunna [the practice of the
Prophet] either abstained from declaring themselves
or took a stand for uncreatedness. The reticence arose
from a reluctance to give expression to what might
conduce to heresy. The dispute brought much humili¬
ation to men of reason and piety, and much blood was
criminally shed. In the name of faith, the community
did violence to faith.
It was in this way that the lines were drawn be¬
tween the thoroughgoing rationalists and the mod¬
erate or extreme upholders of the text of the law. All
were agreed that religious principles were a matter
of obligation for their followers, both in respect of
acts of worship and mutual dealings, and should be
stringently followed. It was recognized that the in¬
ner attitudes of heart and the spiritual life constituted
a binding obligation to which the soul must be set.
A further element in the picture was the sect of
the Dahriyyun [materialists], who believed in hulul
[the incarnation of God in humans] and sought to
foist upon the Qur’an the notions they brought with
them on assuming the externals of Islam. They
strayed far in their exegesis and pretended to find in
every plain deed some hidden mystery. In their han¬
dling of the Qur’an they were as far from the import
of the text as error is from truth. They were known
as the Batiniyya [esoterics] and the Isma’iliyya [a
gnostic Shi‘i sect], as well as by other names current
among historians. Their schools of thought had a
disastrous influence on the faith and undermined
conviction. Their deviations and deeds are only too
familiar.
Despite the identity of purpose shared by the or¬
thodox and those at issue with them, as to the com¬
bating of these atheist sectarians, there were consid¬
erable areas of contention between them and the
vicissitudes were prolonged. This did not prevent
them, however, from mutual borrowing, each group
profiting from the other, until the emergence of
Shaykh Abu'l-Hasan al-Ash‘ari [873-925] early in
the fourth century [a.h.]. He plotted a middle course,
as is well known, between the early “orthodox” and
the subsequent tendencies towards extremes. He
based dogma on the principles of rational enquiry.
The disciples of pristine loyalties doubted his views
and many maligned him. The followers of [Ahmad]
ibn Hanbal [780-855] called him an infidel and de¬
manded his death. A number of eminent ‘ulama’,
however, came to his support, among them Abu Bakr
[Muhammad ibn al-Tayyib] al-Baqillani [circa 948-
1013], the Imam al-Haramayn [the Imam of Mecca
and Medina, that is, AbuT-Ma'ali al-Juwayni, 1028-
1085], and [Abu Ishaq] al-Isfira’ini [died 1027]. His
school came to carry the name of “the people of the
sunna and consensus.” Two powerful forces were
effectively overcome by these esteemed thinkers—
58 Muhammad ‘Abduh
the temper that leans wholly on the literal and the
instinct that runs off into the imaginary and the ex¬
travagant. Two centuries or so later these types sur¬
vived only as insignificant pockets of opinion in the
periphery of the Islamic world.
The disciples of al-Ash‘ari’s school, it should be
remembered, having based their doctrine rationally on
the laws of the universe, required the believer as a
matter of obligation to hold the certainty of these ra¬
tional premises and deductions in the same assurance
with which he accepted the dogmas of faith, insisting
that where proof was wanting, the to-be-proven was
nonexistent also. That outlook continued until the rise
of [Abu Hamid Muhammad] al-Ghazzali [ 1058-1111]
and [Fakhr al-Din] al-Razi [1149-1209] and those
who adopted their position, according to whom one
or even several proofs could be shown to be false, and
yet leave open the possibility of the object whose exis¬
tence it was intended to demonstrate being substanti¬
ated from more adequate evidence. There was, they
held, no justification for making the argument from
the negative instance absolute. As for the schools of
philosophy, they drew their ideas from pure reason,
and the only concern of philosophic rationalists was
to gain knowledge, to satisfy their intellectual curios¬
ity in elucidating the unknown and fathoming the in¬
telligible. They were well able to achieve their objec¬
tives, inasmuch as they were sheltered by the mass of
religious believers who afforded them full liberty of
action to enjoy and give rein to their intellectual in¬
terests, the pursuit of crafts and the strengthening of
the social order through the disclosure of the secrets
hidden in the universe—all in accordance with the
divine mandate for such exploration by thought and
mind: “He created for you all that is in the earth,” [Sura
2, Verse 29] which exempts neither the seen nor the
unseen. Not a single intelligent Muslim sought to de¬
bar them or to impede their findings, the Qur’an hav¬
ing espoused the high role of reason and confirmed
its competence as the ultimate means to happiness and
the criterion between truth and falsehood, worth and
loss. Had not the Prophet observed: “You are most
cognizant of the world and its ways,” and given at the
battle of Badr [in 624] an example of behavior based
on intelligent discernment and the proof of experience.
Nevertheless, it is clear that most of the philoso¬
phers were subject to two influences that got the
better of them. The first was an admiration for all that
derived from the Greek philosophers, notably Plato
[circa 427-347 b.c.] and Aristotle [384^322 b.c.],
and with it a too precipitate inclination to accept their
authority. Second, there was the prevailing contem¬
porary trend of will, and this had the more mischie¬
vous effects. For they got themselves into controver¬
sies obtaining among speculative thinkers in the field
of religion. Though there were relatively few of them,
they clashed with the beliefs predominantly held, and
so came under attack. Then came al-Ghazzali and his
school, who brought sharp criticism to bear upon the
entire content of philosophical lore in the fields of
theology and related themes, including the principles
of substance and accident, theories of matter and
physics, and, indeed, the whole gamut of rationality
in relation to religion. Later exponents of this criti¬
cism became so extreme as to forfeit their following.
Ordinary people turned from them and the special¬
ists became indifferent to them. In due course, time
precluded the results the Muslim world might have
expected from their activities.
All this explains why matters of theology mingle
with philosophy in the writings of later authors like
[‘Abdullah] al-Baydawi [Shafi'i scholar, died circa
1286], al-‘Adud [al-Din al-Iji, Ash'ari scholar, died
1355], and others, and why various rational sciences
became concentrated in a single pursuit, the assump¬
tions and debates of which approximated more to
a traditionalism than a rationalism, whereby the
progress of knowledge was arrested.
Then there supervened the various successive
insurrections aimed at the civil power, in which it was
the obscurantists who got the upper hand, destroy¬
ing the remaining traces of the rational temper which
had its source in the Islamic faith. They betook them¬
selves to devious by-paths, and students of the writ¬
ings of the previous generations found themselves
limited to mere wrangles about words and scrutiny
of methods—and that in a very few books character¬
ized by feebleness and mediocrity.
As a consequence, a complete intellectual confu¬
sion beset the Muslims under their ignorant rulers.
Ideas which had never had any place in science found
sponsors, who asserted things Islam had never before
tolerated. Fostered by the general educational pov¬
erty, they gained ground, aided too by the remote¬
ness of men from the pristine sources of the faith,
They evicted intellect from its rightful place and dealt
arbitrarily with the false and the valid in thinking.
They went so far as to espouse the view of some in
other nations who alleged an enmity between knowl¬
edge and faith. They took up highly misleading po-
LAWS SHOULD CHANGE AND THE THEOLOGY OF UNITY 59
sitions on questions of both morals and doctrine,
things allowed and things forbidden, that is, and even
the issues of Islam and the very denial of God. Their
fantasies fell very far short of the real meaning of
religion, while their ideas and language sadly mis¬
represented God. There can be no doubt that the con¬
sequences befalling the masses of men in their be¬
liefs and principles from this prolonged disaster with
its widespread confusion were grievous and heavy.
The foregoing is a summary of the history of the¬
ology, indicating how it was founded on the Qur’an
and how at length partisanship sadly distorted its true
goal and quality.
We must, however, believe that the Islamic reli¬
gion is a religion of unity throughout. It is not a reli¬
gion of conflicting principles but is built squarely on
reason, while divine revelation is its surest pillar.
Whatever is other than these must be understood as
contentious and inspired by Satan or political pas¬
sions. The Qur’an has cognizance of every man’s
deed and judges the true and the false.
The purpose of this discipline, theology, is the
realization of an obligation about which there is no
dispute, namely, to know God most high in His at¬
tributes that are necessarily to be predicated of Him
and to know His exaltation above all improper and
impossible attribution. It is, with Him, to acknowl¬
edge His messengers with full assurance and heart-
confidence, relying therein upon proof and not tak¬
ing things merely upon tradition. So the Qur’an
directs us, enjoining rational procedure and intellec¬
tual enquiry into the manifestations of the universe,
and, as far as may be, into its particulars, so as to
come by certainty in respect of the things to which it
guides. It forbids us to be slavishly credulous, and
for our stimulus points the moral of peoples who sim¬
ply followed their fathers with complacent satisfac¬
tion and were finally involved in an utter collapse of
their beliefs and their own disappearance as a com¬
munity. Well is it said that traditionalism can have
evil consequences as well as good, and may occasion
loss as well as conduce to gain. It is a deceptive thing,
and though it may be pardoned in an animal, it is
scarcely seemly in man. [. . . ]
It is said by some that if Islam truly came to call di¬
verse peoples into one common unity, and if the
Qur’an says “You have nothing to do with those who
divide over religion and make parties,” [Sura 6, Verse
159] how does it come about that the Islamic com¬
munity has been sundered into sectarian movements
and broken up into groups and schools?
If Islam is a faith that unifies, why this numerous
diversity among Muslims? If Islam turns the believer
in trust toward Him who created the heavens and the
earth, why do multitudes of Muslims turn their faces
to powerless things that can neither avail nor harm, and
apart from God are helpless either way, even to the
point of thinking such practice part of tawhid itself?
If Islam was the first religion to address the ratio¬
nal mind, summoning it to look into the whole ma¬
terial universe, giving it free rein to range at will
through all its secrets, saving only therein the main¬
tenance of faith, how is it that Muslims are content
with so little and many indeed have closed and barred
the door of knowledge altogether, supposing thereby
that God is pleased with ignorance and a neglect of
study of His marvelous handiwork?
How does it happen that the very apostles of love
have become in these days a people who nose around
for it in vain? They who were once exemplary in
energy and action are now the very picture of sloth
and idleness?
What are all these accretions to their religion,
when all the time Muslims have the very Book of God
as a balance in which to weigh and discriminate all
their conjectures, and yet its very injunctions they
abandon and forsake?
If Islam really is so solicitous for the mind and
hearts of men, why today in the opinion of so many
is it somehow beyond the reach of those who would
grasp it?
If Islam welcomes and invites enquiry into its
contents, why is the Qur’an not read except by chant¬
ing, and even the majority of the educated men of
religion only know it very approximately?
If Islam granted to reason and will the honor of
independence, how is it that it has bound them with
such chains? If it has established the principles of
justice, why are the greater part of its rulers such
models of tyranny? If religion eagerly anticipates the
liberation of slaves, why have Muslims spent centu¬
ries enslaving the free?
If Islam regards loyalty to covenants, honesty, and
fulfilment of pledges as being its very pillars, how
does it come about that deception, falsehood, perfidy,
and calumny are so current among Muslims?
If Islam forbids fraud and treachery and warns
imposters that they have neither part not lot in it, how
is it that Muslims practice deception against God. the
60 Muhammad ‘Abduh
sacred law, and the true and loyal believers? If it
prohibits all abomination, whether evident or hidden,
what is it we see among them, both secret and open,
both physical and spiritual?
If Islam teaches that religion consists in sincerity
before God, His Apostle, and fellow believers in both
immediate and general relationships, if “man is the
loser , save those who believe, do good works, and
enjoin upon each other justice and patience” [Sura
103, Verses 1-3] and yet, not enjoining kindliness
or forbidding evil, they go altogether to the bad, and
their honest folk call and get no response, and if this
which they quite fail to fulfill is in fact their most
bounden duty, why is it that they thus so totally fail
to counsel each other and lay upon each other
squarely what the divine will requires? Why do they
not hold to it with fortitude and speak truth about
right and wrong? Who do they in fact take each their
own way, letting things go as they will in rabid indi¬
vidualism, ignoring each other’s affairs as if they
were totally unrelated the one to the other, having
nothing in common? Why do sons murder fathers,
and daughters prove refractory toward their mothers?
Where are the bowels of mercy, of compassion for a
neighbor? Where is the just dealing the rich owe to
the poor with their possessions? Rather the rich plun¬
der even what remains in the hands of the wretched,
A glimmer of Islam, it is said, illuminated the
west, but its full light is in the east. Yet precisely there
its own people lie in the deepest glom and cannot see.
Does this seem intelligible? Is there any parallel in
the annals of men? Doesit not appear that the very
Muslims who have known something of science are
precisely those who, for the most part, instinctively
regard Islam’s doctrines as superstitious and its prin¬
ciples and precepts as a farce? They find pleasure in
aping the free-thinking peopl e who scoff and jeer and
think themselves forward-looking. Do you not see
Muslims whose only business with the scriptures is
to finger their pages, while they preen themselves on
being memorizers of their precepts and expert in their
laws? How far they are from the rational study of the
Qur’an which they despise and regard as worthless
to religion and the world! Many of them simply pride
themselves on ignorance, as if thereby they had
evaded prohibited things and achieved some distinc¬
tion. Those Muslims who stand on the threshold of
science see their faith as a kind of old garment in
which it is embarrassing to appear among men, while
those who deceive themselves that they have some
pretension to be religious and orthodox believers in
its doctrines regard reason as a devil and science as
supposition. Can we not, in the light of all this, call
God, His angels, and all men to witness that science
and reason have no accord with this religion?
It may well be said that the foregoing has not
exaggerated the plight of Muslims today, indeed,
these several generations past. But is the objection
the whole story? Parallels could be found in the de¬
scriptions of Islam in their day given by al-Ghazzali,
[Abu ‘Abdullah Muhammad] Ibnal-Hajj [died 1336],
and other writers on religion, filling whole volumes,
both about the general population and the intelligen¬
tsia. But the reading of the Qur’an suffices of itself
to vindicate what I have said about the essential na¬
ture of Islamic religion, provided it is read with care
to understand its real import, interpreted according
to the understanding of those among whom it was
sent down and to the way they put it into practice.
To admit the validity of what I have said of its fine
effects, it suffices to read the pages of history as in¬
dited by those who truly knew slam and the objec¬
tive writers in other nations. Such Islam was—and
is. We have earlier said that religion is guidance and
reason. Whoever uses it well and takes its directives
will gain the blessedness God has promised to those
who follow it. As a medicine for human society its
success when truly tried is so manifest that not even
the blind and the deaf can deny or gainsay it. All that
the objection just elaborated leads to is this: a physi¬
cian treated a sick man with medicine and he recov¬
ered; then the doctor himself succumbed to the dis¬
ease he had been treating. In dire straits from pain
and with the medicine by him in the house, he has
yet no will to use it. Many of those who come to visit
him or seek his ministrations or even gloat over his
illness could take up the medicine and be cured, while
he himself despairs of life and waits either for death
or some miraculous healing.
We have now set forth the religion of Islam and
its true character. As for those Muslims who by their
conduct have become an argument against it, these
must be dealt with not here, but in another book, if
God wills.
4
Qasim Amin
The Emancipation ofWoman and
The New Woman
Qasim Amin (Egypt, 1863-1908) was renowned for his support of women’s liberation
in the Islamic world. Amin was bom in Alexandna to an Egyptian mother and a Turkish
father, a former Ottoman governor of Kurdistan who had retired to Egypt following a
major revolt in that province. After finishing his primary education at the aristocratic Ras
al-Tin School and the Khedival School, Qasim Amin obtained a bachelor’s degree in law
in 1881 from the School of Law and Administration and was sent to France in an educa¬
tional mission for five years to study law. There, he joined Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani
(chapter I I) and Muhammad 'Abduh (chapter 3) and participated in their publication of
the journal al-'Urwa al-wuthqa (The Strongest Link). After his return to Egypt, he joined
the judicial system and worked as attorney general and judge. Amin's major works in¬
clude Les Egyptiens (The Egyptians, 1894), in which he defended Islam’s treatment of
women, and Tahrir al-mar’a (The Liberation ofWoman, 1899), to which 'Abduh secretly
contributed sections. The latter book, whose introduction is presented here, called for
an end to the seclusion of women, an improvement in their status, and widespread edu¬
cation of girls. The book generated heated controversy in Egyptian intellectual circles, to
which Amin responded in al-Mar'a al-jadida (The New Woman, 1900)—whose conclu¬
sion is also presented here—adopting further liberal views, such as the need for women's
participation alongside men in public life. 1
The Emancipation of Woman
I call on every lover of truth to examine with me the
status of women in Egyptian society. I am confident
that such individuals will arrive independently at the
same conclusion I have, namely the necessity of im¬
proving the status of Egyptian women. The truth I
am presenting today has preoccupied me for a long
time; I have considered it, examined it, and analyzed
it. When it was eventually stripped of all confound¬
ing errors, it occupied an important place in my think-
Qasim Amin, The Liberation of Woman and The New
Woman: Two Documents in the History of Egyptian Femi¬
nism, translated from Arabic by Samiha Sidhom Peterson
(Cairo, Egypt: © American University in Cairo Press, 2000),
pp. 3-10; al-Mar'a al-jadida (The New Woman), in Muham¬
mad ‘Imara, ed., Qasim Amin: al-‘Amal al-kamila (Qasim
Amin: The Complete Works) (Cairo, Egypt: Dar al-Shuruq,
1989), pp. 511-518. Translation of second piece from Ara¬
bic by Lisa Pollard and Raghda El Essawi. First published
in 1899 and 1900, respectively. Introduction by Emad Eldin
Shahin.
ing, rivaled other ideas, overcame them, and finally
reached the point where it became my dominant
thought, alerting me to its advantages and remind¬
ing me of its necessity. I became aware of the absence
of a platform from which this truth could be elevated
from reflection to the unlimited space of appeal and
attention.
A profound factor that influences human devel¬
opment and ensures its positive future is the strange
power that compels a human being to communicate
every scientific or literary idea once it crystallizes in
the mind, and once it is accompanied by the belief
that it will benefit the progress of future generations.
1. Muhammad ‘Imara, Qasim Amin: Tahrir al-mar’a wa
al-tamadun al-islami (Qasim Amin: The Liberation ofWoman
and Islamic Civilization) (Cairo, Egypt: Dar al-Shuruq,
1988); Samir Abu Hamdan, Qasim Amin: Jadaliyat al-'alaqa
bayn al-mar’a wa al-nahda (Qasim Amin: The Dialectical Re¬
lationship Between Woman and Renaissance ) (Beirut. Leba¬
non: al-Sharikaal-'Alamiyya li al-Kitab. 1993); Leila Ahmed,
Women and Gender in Islam: Historical Roots of a Modem
Debate (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press. 1992).
61
62 Qasim Amin
Communicating these findings supersedes concern
over any negative consequences that may be incurred
by the individual in presenting his knowledge. The
impact of this power is recognized by anyone who
has experienced a trace of it. Such an individual feels
that if he fails to use this power toward the goal it is
aiming to achieve, and if he does not use whatever
strength he has to assist it in reaching that goal, it will
eventually overcome him in the struggle, resisting
him if he opposes it, coercing him if he tries to force
it, and appearing in an unfamiliar form, like a gas that
could not be contained through pressure. In fact, the
pressure may cause an explosion that would destroy
its container.
History offers numerous proofs of this phenome¬
non. The history of nations is saturated with disputes,
arguments, sufferings, and wars that originated with
the purpose of establishing the superiority of one idea
or ideology over another. During these encounters
victory was sometimes for truth and at other times
for falsehood. This characterized Islamic countries
during the early days and the middle ages, and con¬
tinues to characterize Western countries. It is reason¬
able to state that the life of Western countries is a
continuous struggle between truth and falsehood,
between right and wrong: it is an internal struggle in
all branches of education, the arts, and industry, and
an external struggle among the various countries.
This is especially obvious in this century when dis¬
tance and isolation have been eliminated by modem
inventions, and when the separating borders and for¬
bidding walls have been tom down. These changes
are reflected in the increasing number of individuals
who have toured the whole world and who presently
can be counted by the thousands. Likewise, the ideas
of any Western scholar, when formulated in a book,
are translated and published simultaneously in five
or six languages.
Countries like ours have preferred a less ruffled
existence. This is because we have neglected the
nurturing of our minds to such an extent that they
have become like barren soil, unfit for any growth.
Our laziness has caused us to be hostile to every
unfamiliar idea, whether a product of the sound prin¬
cipal traditions or of current events.
An intellectually lazy person whose arguments are
weak is often satisfied, in refuting an apparent truth,
to hurl a false remark and declare it a heresy in Islam.
He only makes this false remark to avoid the effort
of understanding the truth, or to disengage from the
labor of research, or to avoid its application. It is as
if God created the Muslims from clay especially set
aside for them and freed them from obeying natural
law, whose power dominates human beings and the
rest of living creation.
Some people will say that today I am publishing
heresy. To these people I will respond: Yes, I have
come up with a heresy, but the heresy is not against
Islam. It is against our traditions and social dealings,
which ought to be brought to perfection. Why should
a Muslim believe that traditions cannot be changed
or replaced by new ones, and that it is his duty to
preserve them forever? Why does he drag this belief
along to his work, even though he and his traditions
are a part of the universe, falling at all times under
the laws of change? Can the Muslim contradict God’s
laws of creation—God who has made change a pre¬
requisite for life and progress, rather than immobil¬
ity and inflexibility, which are characteristic of death
and backwardness? Is not tradition merely the set of
conventions of a country defining the special customs
appropriate to its life and behavior at a specific time
and place? How can people believe that traditions
never change, and at the same time maintain the
understanding that traditions are one of the intellec¬
tual products of humans, and that human intellect
differs according to historical era or geographical
location? Does the presence of Muslims in various
parts of the world imply a uniformity of traditions
or ways of life? Who can pretend that Sudanese pref¬
erences are similar to those of the Turks, the Chinese,
or the Indians; or believe that the Bedouin tradition
is appropriate for an urbanite; or claim that the tra¬
ditions of any country have remained the same since
the creation of that country?
In truth, during a specific historical era every
country has peculiar traditions and mores that match
its intellectual state. These traditions and mores
change continuously in an unobtrusive way, so that
people living during that era are unaware of the
changes. However, the changes are influenced by
regional factors, heredity, intercultural exchanges,
scientific inventions, ethical ideologies, religious
beliefs, political structures, and other factors. Every
intellectual movement toward progress is inevitably
followed by an appropriate change in the traditions
and mores of a society. Therefore, there should be
examples of differences between the Sudanese and
the Turks comparable to the differences in their in¬
tellectual status. This is a well-known, established
THE EMANCIPATION OF WOMAN AND THE NEW WOMAN 63
fact. The differences between Egyptians and Euro¬
peans also need to be considered in this context.
We cannot consider traditions (which are merely
a way of life for an individual, family, compatriots,
and children of the race) to be the same in a civilized
nation as in an ignorant, barbaric one, because the
behavior of every individual in a society is appropri¬
ate to the intellectual abilities of that society and to
the method by which its children are brought up.
This total interdependence between the traditions
of a nation and its level of civilization and knowl¬
edge suggests that the power of tradition controls a
country more than any other power, and that tradi¬
tion is one of the most influential permanent com¬
ponents of a nation, and is least likely to change.
Therefore, citizens of a nation cannot but comply
with the existing traditions, unless they change, or
unless their intellectual level increases or decreases.
Thus I believe that traditions always overcome other
factors in a society, and that they even influence the
laws of that society. This belief is confirmed through
daily observation of the laws and programs of our
nation, which are usually intended to improve the
state of affairs but are immediately turned around to
become new instruments for corruption. It is not dif¬
ficult to understand this phenomenon, because at
times tradition may even supersede the existing reli¬
gion, destroying or transforming it so that those who
are most knowledgeable about religion eventually
disown its existing form.
This is the basis of our observations. This evi¬
dence of history confirms and demonstrates that the
status of women is inseparably tied to the status of a
nation. When the status of a nation is low, reflecting
an uncivilized condition for that nation, the status of
women is also low, and when the status of a nation
is elevated, reflecting the progress and civilization
of that nation, the status of women in that country is
also elevated. We have learned that women in the first
human societies were treated as slaves. The ancient
Greeks and Romans, for example, considered a
woman to be under the power of her father, then her
husband, and after him his eldest son. The head of
the family had the absolute right of ownership over
her life. He could dispose of her through trade, do¬
nation, or death, whenever and in whatever way he
wished. His heirs eventually inherited her and with
her all the rights that were given to the owner. Prior
to Islam, it was acceptable for Arab fathers to kill
their daughters, and for men to gratify themselves
with women with no legal bonds or numerical lim¬
its. This authority still prevails among uncivilized Af¬
rican and American tribes. Some Asians even believe
that a woman has no immortal soul, and that she
should not live after her husband dies. Other Asians
present her to their guests as a sign of hospitality, just
as one would present a guest with the best of his
possessions.
These traits are present among emerging societ¬
ies, which are based on familial and tribal bonds
rather than on formal structures. Force is the only law
with which such societies are familiar. The use of
force is also the medium of control for governments
run by autocratic structures.
On the other hand, we find that women in nations
with a more advanced civilization have gradually
advanced from the low status to which they have
been relegated, and have started to overcome the gap
that has separated them from men. One woman is
crawling while the other is taking steps; one is walk¬
ing while the other is running. These discrepancies
reflect the different societies to which these women
belong and the level of civilization of these societ¬
ies. The American woman is in the forefront, fol¬
lowed by the British, the German, the French, the
Austrian, the Italian, and the Russian woman, and so
on. Women in all these societies have felt that they
deserve their independence, and are searching for the
means to achieve it. These women believe that they
are human beings and that they deserve freedom, and
they are therefore striving for freedom and demand¬
ing every human right.
Westerners, who like to associate all good things
with their religion, believe that the Western woman
has advanced because her Christian religion helped
her achieve freedom. This belief, however, is inac¬
curate. Christianity did not set up a system which
guarantees the freedom of women; it does not guar¬
antee her rights through either specific or general
rules; and it does not prescribe any guiding prin¬
ciples on this topic. In every country where Chris¬
tianity has been introduced and spread, it has left
no tangible impact on the normative stmcture affect¬
ing women’s status. On the contrary, Christianity
has been molded by the traditions and manners of
the specific nations in which it was introduced. If
there were a religion which could have had power
and influence over local traditions, then the Mus¬
lim women today should have been at the forefront
of free women on earth.
64 Qasim Amin
The Islamic legal system, the shari ‘a, stipulated the
equality of women and men before any other legal
system. Islam declared women’s freedom and eman¬
cipation, and granted women all human rights during
a time when women occupied the lowest status in all
societies. According to Islamic law, women are con¬
sidered to possess the same legal capabilities in all civil
cases pertaining to buying, donating, trusteeship, and
disposal of goods, unhindered by requirements of
permission from either their father or their husband.
These advantages have not yet been attained by some
contemporary Western women, yet they demonstrate
that respect for women and for their equality with men
were basic to the principles of the liberal shari'a. In
fact, our legal system went so far in its kindness to
women that it rid them of the burden of earning a liv¬
ing and freed them from the obligation of participat¬
ing in household and child-rearing expenses. This is
unlike some Western laws, which equate men and
women only with regard to their duties, giving pref¬
erence to men with regard to societal rights.
Within the shari'a, the tendency to equate men’s
and women’s rights is obvious, even in the context
of divorce. Islam has created for women mechanisms
worthy of consideration and contrary to what West¬
erners and some Muslims imagine or believe. These
will be discussed later,
Islamic law favors men in one area only—po¬
lygamy. The reason is obvious and is related to the
issue of lineage, without which marriage is meaning¬
less. This topic too will be addressed later. In sum¬
mary, nothing in the laws of Islam or in its intentions
can account for the low status of Muslim women. The
existing situation is contrary to the law, because
originally women in Islam were granted an equal
place in human society.
What a pity! Unacceptable customs, traditions,
and superstitions inherited from the countries in
which Islam spread have been allowed to permeate
this beautiful religion. Knowledge in these countries
had not developed to the point of giving women the
status already given them by the shari'a.
The most significant factor that accounts for the
perpetuation of these traditions, however, is the suc¬
cession over us of despotic governments. At various
times and places, Islamic societies have been stripped
of the political structures that delineated the rights
of the ruler and the ruled, and that granted to the ruled
the right to demand that the rulers stop at the limits
established for them by the shari'a. In fact, their
governments continually took on a despotic nature,
with their sultan and his assistants having total au¬
thority. Thus they ruled however they wished, with¬
out restraint, counsel, or supervision, and they admin¬
istered the affairs of their citizens without these
having any say.
Yes, rulers, whether important or unimportant, are
obliged to follow justice and avoid injustice. Experi¬
ence demonstrates, however, that unlimited power is
a temptation for abuse, especially when it is unac¬
countable, unchallenged by any other opinion, and
unsupervised by any formal structure. This explains
why for so many centuries absolute and autocratic rule
was the norm for Islamic countries. Rulers adminis¬
tered these nations poorly and were excessive in their
capricious tampering with the affairs of their subjects;
quite often they even tampered with religion. There
are a few exceptions to this pattern, but they are in¬
significant in contrast to the majority of cases.
When despotism prevails in a country, its impact
is not limited to individual cases only, since it is cen¬
tral to the ideology of the supreme ruler. Despotism
continues to flow from him to those around him, and
they in turn influence their subordinates. A despot
spits his spirit into every powerful person, who,
whenever possible, dominates a weaker one. This
attitude pervades the life of all individuals, regard¬
less of the approval or disapproval of the supreme
ruler. These despotic systems have also influenced
the relationships between men and women—man in
his superiority began to despise woman in her weak¬
ness. As a result, corrupt morals became the first sign
of a country ruled by a despot.
Initially, one would assume that a person who ex¬
periences injustice would love justice, and that he
would be inclined toward compassion, having expe¬
rienced the suffering resulting from the catastrophes
which have befallen him. Observation indicates, how¬
ever, that an oppressed nation does not contain an
appropriate and fit environment for the development
of desirable virtues. The only plant that grows in an
oppressed nation is that of depravity. Every Egyptian
who has lived under despotic rule in the not-very-
distant past knows that the village mayor, robbed of
ten Egyptian pounds, reclaims a hundred pounds from
his villagers, and that the village chief, struck with one
hundred lashes, upon his return to the village takes his
revenge upon a hundred peasants!
The natural implication of this situation is that
human beings respect only force and are deterred
THE EMANCIPATION OF WOMAN AND THE NEW WOMAN 65
only by fear. When women were weak, men crushed
their rights, despised them, treated them with con¬
tempt, and stomped on their personality. A woman
had a very low status, regardless of her position in
the family as wife, mother, or daughter. She was of
no importance, was ignored, and had no legitimate
opinions. She was submissive to a man because he
was a man and she a woman. She obliterated her¬
self in the person of the man. She was allowed noth¬
ing in the universe except that which she concealed
in the corners of her home. She specialized in ig¬
norance and secluded herself with the curtains of
darkness. A man used her as an object of delight
and pleasure, amused himself with her whenever
he wished, and threw her into the road whenever he
wished. He had freedom and she had bondage; he
had knowledge and she had ignorance; he had a
mind and she had simple-mindedness; he had light
and space and she had darkness and prison; he had
absolute authority and she had only obedience and
patience. Everything in existence belonged to him,
and she was part of that totality of which he took
possession.
Despising the woman, a man filled his home with
slaves, white or black, or with numerous wives, sat¬
isfying himself with any of them whenever his pas¬
sion and lust drove him. He ignored the prescribed
religious obligations, which required good intentions
for his actions arid justice in his dealings.
Despising the woman, a man divorced her with¬
out reason.
Despising the woman, a man sat alone at the din¬
ing table, while his mother, sisters, and wife gathered
after he was done to eat what was left over.
Despising the woman, a man appointed a guard¬
ian to protect her chastity. Thus a eunuch, a legal
guardian, or a servant supervised, observed, and ac¬
companied her wherever she went.
Despising the woman, a man imprisoned her in
the house and boasted about her permanent restric¬
tion, which was lifted only when she was to be car¬
ried in her coffin to the grave.
Despising the woman, a man announced that she
was unworthy of trust and honesty.
Despising the woman, a man secluded her from
public life and kept her from involvement in anything
except female or personal issues. A woman had no
opinions on business, political movements, the arts,
public affairs, or doctrinal issues, and she had no
patriotic pride or religious feelings.
I do not exaggerate when I say that this has been
the status of women in Egypt until the past few years,
when we have witnessed a decrease in the power of
men. This change is a consequence of the increased
intellectual development of men, and the moderation
of their rulers. We have observed that women at
present have more freedom to look after their own
affairs, that they quite often go to public parks in
order to take the fresh air and to see the works of the
Sublime Creator, displayed for the eyes of all hu¬
mans, whether male or female. In fact, many women
now accompany their husbands during their business
trips to other countries. Likewise, many men have
given women a special status within the family struc¬
ture. This has occurred among men who are confi¬
dent in their women and have no worries regarding
their trustworthiness. This is a new kind of respect
for women.
Yet we cannot claim that this change removes the
need for criticism. In reality, the causes of criticism
are not change but the conditions surrounding it.
Among the most important of these are the firmly
established tradition of veiling among the majority
of the population, and the inadequate socialization
of women. Were women’s socialization effected in
accordance with religious and moral principles, and
were the use of the veil terminated at limits familiar
in most Islamic schools of belief, then these criticisms
would be dropped and our country would benefit
from the active participation of all its citizens, men
and women alike.
The Current State of Thinking about
the Situation of Women in Egypt
Egyptians have, over the last few years, become aware
of the poor state of their social order. They have begun
to show signs of dissatisfaction with it, and felt the
need to improve it. They have heard about the West,
have intermingled with Westerners, spent time with
many of them, and learned about the West’s progress.
When Egyptians saw the good life that Westerners
enjoyed, their widespread influence and their indisput¬
able word, as well as certain other advantages from
which they themselves were forbidden—but without
which life has no value—a desire spread among them
to keep up with the West and its blessings. Leaders
arose among them who competed with each other to
disseminate new thoughts, thoughts which they be-
66 Qasim Amin
lieved would guide the community down the road to
success. One would call for work and action, and an¬
other for harmony and unity, and for the rejection of
any possible sources of discord. A third would call for
love of the country and self-sacrifice in its service. A
fourth, nothing less than increased adherence to the
precepts of religion, and so on.
But one factor escaped the attention of these lead¬
ers: these ideas, and those similar to them, won’t have
any influence worth mentioning upon the community
if they do not reach women, and if women do not
understand their meanings. They will not have any
influence if women are not favorably disposed to
them, or are not filled with love for them, such that
their children embody the perfect picture that repre¬
sents human perfection.
This is because no social condition can be
changed unless it is made the target of education. It
is not enough for a reform program, no matter what
its target, to consist merely of a government order
issued to spur the masses to action, or of a speech
designed to encourage its listeners to want to change.
Nor can it consist merely of books and articles writ¬
ten about the benefits of change. These will merely
inform a nation about the state of its deteriorating
conditions; they are not the means by which people
will change, nor are they the things that will trans¬
form a people from one state to another. Any and all
change must be the result of a confluence of virtues,
characteristics, morals, and customs which are not
innate to the individual upon his birth. They cannot
be had except through training, or, in other words,
they cannot be had without women.
Hence, if Egyptians want to reform their current
situation, they must begin with the roots of reform.
They must believe that there is no hope that they will
become a vibrant community, one that can play an
important role alongside the developed countries,
with a place in the world of human civilization, until
their homes and their families become a proper en¬
vironment for providing men with the characteristics
upon which success in the world depends. And there
is no hope that Egyptian homes and families will
become that proper environment unless women are
educated and unless they participate alongside men
in their thoughts, hopes and pains, even if they do
not participate in all of their activities.
This truth, despite its simplicity and its self-evi¬
dent nature, was considered by certain people, upon
its publication last year [in the author’s book The
Liberation of Women, 1899], to be a kind of lunacy.
Legal scholars decided that it was an offense to Islam.
And many graduates from the madrasas [seminaries]
saw it as an exaggerated imitation of the West. Some
of them went so far as to say that it was a crime
against the country and against religion. In their
writings, they were even so deluded as to say that the
liberation of Eastern women was something that the
Christian nations were striving for in order to destroy
Islam, and that any Muslim who supports women’s
liberation is not, in fact, a Muslim. These are delu¬
sions that the simple-minded are inclined toward and
that the ignorant delight in believing, because they
do not understand where their true interests lie. Such
delusions prevent them from reaching the truth.
We have but one word with which to respond to
such people: If the Europeans intended to destroy us,
they would have only to leave us to our own devices!
They have no more perfect method than to leave us
in our present situation!
This is the indisputable truth, and no matter how
much one group might try to hide it, or how much
another group might try to neglect it, it will be made
clear to everyone, sooner or later, just as the truth
always is.
Anyone observing our present social situation will
find proof of the fact that our women have broken
away from their role as slave, and that there remains
but a hijab [that is, a thin veil] between them and
freedom. Such an observer sees:
1. A new awareness amongst the Egyptians of the
necessity of educating their daughters, rather than
teaching them nothing, as was their custom.
2. A decrease in the use of the hijab and its con¬
comitant institutions, such as segregation, and a
movement toward its obsolescence.
3. The displeasure that our youth takes in marriage
along the lines that it is now practiced, as well
as their desire to change that practice through [the
institution] of engagement.
4. The government’s interest, as well as that of cer¬
tain Egyptians—at the head of them being His
Excellency Shaykh Muhammad ‘Abduh [Egypt,
1849-1905; see chapter 3], mufti [chief religious
official] of Egypt—in reforming the shari ‘a [Is¬
lamic law] courts. Anyone who sees the report
that His Excellency made regarding these courts
will find a number of matters regarding the re¬
form of the Egyptian family. The matter that is
THE EMANCIPATION OF WOMAN AND THE NEW WOMAN 67
most worthy of mention is the mufti’s statement
about polygamy:
I am hereby raising my voice in complaint over the
number of wives that poor men are marrying. Indeed,
many of them take four wives; some have three,
others two, without being able to support them.
These men continuously fight with their wives over
expenses and over their marital rights. Moreover,
they will not divorce a single one of their wives and,
thus, depravity continues to affect them and their
children. [In this state] it becomes impossible for
men and women to respect the limits that God has
placed on mankind’s freedom of action. [This con¬
dition] damages Islam and the Islamic community
in ways too clear to explain.
This year, it happened that the wives of men who
had been sentenced to life in prison, hard labor, or
long prison terms, complained to the Ministry of
Justice about their unhappy condition, with no means
available for them to divorce their husbands and no
family member who could support them or their chil¬
dren. The Ministry found itself in need of consult¬
ing the mufti about the legal recourses that could be
adopted in response to such complaints. He studied
the issue and others similar to it, and in response to
them he produced eleven stipulations, in line with the
Maliki madhhab [school of law], which we present
below for the reader’s benefit.
Stipulation One: If the husband refuses to provide
for his wife despite the fact that he has a clear source
of income, he is sentenced to pay alimony. If he has
no clear source of income and continues to refuse to
provide for his wife, the judge grants the wife a di¬
vorce from him on the spot. If the man claims finan¬
cial incapability but cannot prove it, the judge takes
the same action. But, if he can prove incapability, he
is given a one-month grace period—no more—at the
end of which he is considered divorced if he does not
provide for his wife.
Stipulation Two: If the husband is ill or impris¬
oned and he refuses to provide for his wife, the judge
grants him a period of time after which it is assumed
that he will be cured or released from prison. If the
period of illness or imprisonment is so long that harm
or fitna [dissension] is feared, the judge grants the
wife a divorce.
Stipulation Three: If the husband is absent for a
short period of time, but before his departure he did
not leave means of provision for his wife, the judge
fixes a date by which he must send provisions. If he
does not, the judge grants the wife a divorce after the
fixed period elapses. In the case that he is absent for
a long period or his destination is unknown, and it is
proven that he has no means of providing for his wife,
the judge grants the wife a divorce.
Stipulation Four: If someone owed the husband
money, or if he left money in someone’s trust, the
wife has the right to ask to be provided for from that
money. She also has the right to make a refutation
of anyone who claims that she has no right to that
trust, after swearing that she deserves to be provided
for by the absentee, and after swearing that he, in¬
deed, left nothing behind for her provision, and that
he left no guardian to provide for her.
Stipulation Five: The judge’s prerogative in di¬
vorcing a man from his wife for not providing for her
is refutable. The husband has the right to remarry his
wife if he proves his sources of provision and his
willingness to support her through them. If he does
not do both, any return to his wife is unacceptable.
Stipulation Six: If a man is lost in an Islamic land
and there is no news of him, his wife has the right to
raise the issue at the Ministry of Justice. She can, in
front of the court, proclaim what she believes to be
his fate, or his whereabouts. Then, the Minister of
Justice should search for him in the areas where she
believes him to be, either through the courts or by
means of the police. If the Minister fails to find the
lost husband, he sets for the wife a period of four
years. If those four years pass, the woman must then
wait out the time of her ‘idda [Qur’anic term of wait¬
ing before remarriage, apparently to clarify pater¬
nity]. Without then needing to return to the courts,
she is allowed to remarry.
Stipulation Seven: If the absentee returns or
proves to be alive, and if he does so before his wife’s
new husband consummates the marriage, not know¬
ing that the absentee is alive, then the wife is returned
to her original husband. If, in fact, the second hus¬
band knew all along that the original husband was
alive, the wife is also returned to her original hus¬
band. If the death of the original husband is discov¬
ered during the wife’s period of ‘idda or after it and
before the new marriage contract is drawn or after it,
the wife inherits her original husband’s properly if
the second husband was ignorant of the first
husband’s death. However, if in fact the first husband
died and the second husband knew of his death be-
68 Qasim Amin
fore consummating the marriage, then the wife in¬
herits nothing.
Stipulation Eight: If a man dies in a conflict be¬
tween Muslims, and it is proved that he indeed fought
in said conflict, his wife is permitted to raise the issue
before the Ministry of Justice. If after the Minister
of Justice searches for the man, and after the period
of ‘idda has passed, then the woman can remarry if
she wishes, and his money goes to her heirs. If all
that can be proven is that the man went along with
the fighting armies, then the case is reverted to stipu¬
lations six and seven.
Stipulation Nine: The wife of a man missing as
the result of a war between Muslims has the right to
take her case before the Minister of Justice. After the
minister has the man searched for, a period of one
year is set. If that year passes and the man is not
found, the woman then begins her period of ‘idda.
She then has the right to remarry, and his money is
inherited at the end of the year.
This process of setting a grace period is valid only
in cases in which the absentee had, before disappear¬
ing, an income with which to provide for his wife,
or in cases in which the wife does not fear seduction.
Otherwise, the judge grants the wife a divorce once
the woman’s claim is proven to be true.
Stipulation Ten: If a dispute between a husband
and wife becomes quite severe, and it cannot be
solved through one of the means provided for in
the Book of God, the case is brought to the pro¬
vincial judge. He must then appoint two trustwor¬
thy arbitrators, one of them from the husband’s
family and the other from the wife’s. It is best if
they are neighbors. If it is difficult to find such
arbitrators from among the members of their fam¬
ily, then they are chosen from among people out¬
side of the family.
The arbitrators are then sent to the couple. If they
are able to settle the dispute between the couple, so
be it. Otherwise, they recommend divorce and bring
the matter before the judge. He is required to rule
according to what his appointed arbitrators have
recommended. In this case, the divorce is revoc¬
able, and the arbitrators have no right to make it
irrevocable.
Stipulation Eleven: The wife has the right to ask
the judge to grant her a divorce if she is harmed by
her husband. The shari'a does not permit a man to
harm his wife, just as it does not permit desertion or
beating or abuse without legitimate reason. It is in¬
cumbent upon the wife to prove, by legal means, that
her husband is harmful to her.
The Shaykh of al-Azhar lent his agreement to this
project, and sent Muhammad ‘Abduh the following
letter:
To the Mufti of Egypt, may God keep you:
We have received your letter dated the fourth of
Rabi‘i al-thani 1318 [August 2, 1900], number 19,
containing eleven stipulations, following the
guidelines of the Maliki madhhab , about which you
seek our opinion. We conclude as you do, and thus
grant you our agreement. We thank you for high
aspirations, as they are reflected in your interest in
this venerable matter.
Signed,
Salim al-Bishri [Egypt, 1832-1917], the humble
Maliki
Servant of knowledge and of the humble ones at
al-Azhar
These two issues—that of polygamy and that of
granting women the right to divorce her husband—
are amongst the most important issues that I addressed
in my book The Liberation of Women , and about
which Shaykh Muhammad ‘Abduh, a great religious
scholar and a wise jurisprudent, has called worthy of
his interest. He supports my suggestions about po¬
lygamy and divorce in a voice that is well heeded.
The sum of these facts—and then some—along
with the things that one witnesses every day in Egyp¬
tian homes, foretells that the state of Egyptian women
is in need of improvement.
This movement did not result from study. It grew,
rather, through the influence of contact with West¬
erners, and according to the law known to natural
scientists, which orders that every animal follow the
nature of the environment in which he lives. The
proof that our will does not interfere with this move¬
ment lies in the fact that when we pointed out the
necessity of preserving and continuing the movement
until our goals are met, we met with serious opposi¬
tion even from those in whose selves and in whose
homes the changes that we work for had already
appeared.
There is nothing strange about this: It has always
been our way to follow our whims.
If it makes no difference to us whether we spend
our lives in excess or lack, richness or poverty, free¬
dom or servitude, knowledge or ignorance, virtue or
depravity, then it would be my opinion that there is
THE EMANCIPATION OF WOMAN AND THE NEW WOMAN
69
no need for the freedom and the education that have
been granted to Egyptian women up till now. If it
makes no difference, then let men have a number of
women, and marry a new woman every day, only to
divorce her the next, and imprison their wives and
daughters and sisters and grandmothers if they wish!!
In Africa and Asia there are a number of countries in
which women live entombed in their homes, from
which they see no one and encounter no one. And
amongst these nations there are those that have de¬
cayed to the extent that when a woman’s husband dies
she must kill herself, so that she may not enjoy life
without him! What else can we do but direct our at¬
tention to these countries and ask them what the se¬
cret to the progress of their women is, in ignorance and
isolation. Perhaps we will learn from them how to iso¬
late our women and hold them back even further!!!!
But if what we hear and read about every day is
true, that Egyptians want to create a living, advanced,
civil nation, then we have the following to say to
them:
There is a means of getting yourselves out of the
poor condition that you complain about. There is a
way of raising yourselves up to the highest level of
civilization—the kind of civilization you aspire to,
and then some. It consists of liberating your women
from the bondage of ignorance and hijab [here, iso¬
lation]. This means was not our brainchild; we de¬
serve no credit for its invention. Nations have used
it before us, tested it, and put it to their advantage.
Take a look at the Western nations; you will find
amongst their women great differences. You’ll find
that the way American women are raised, and their
morals and habits and manners, are not those of
French women. And you’ll find French women to be
entirely different from Russian women. And you’ll
find that the Italian woman has nothing in common
with the Swedish or the German woman. But all of
these women, despite differences in their regions,
nationalities, languages, and religions, share a com¬
mon ground in one matter: they enjoy freedom and
independence.
It is this freedom that has delivered Western
women from their former state of decline. And once
they were granted an education, women began to
direct their energies, working alongside of men, to
the establishment of and participation in charitable
societies. This took place when women were given
useful work—different, no doubt, from that of men.
But just because this work is different does not mean
that it lacks importance: women’s work is like that
of the merchant who spends his day bent over his
goods in order to sell them, or the scribe who spends
long hours in some governmental bureau writing an
inter-departmental report. It is like that of the engi¬
neer who builds a bridge in order to make transpor¬
tation easier, or the doctor who amputates a patient’s
limb in order to preserve life in other limbs. It is like
that of the judge who mediates in the disputes that
arise between people. But none of these has the right
to call his work more useful to the social order than
the woman who gives to society the gift of a well-
raised man, useful to himself, his family, and his
country.
We aren’t saying the same things to you that oth¬
ers say, things like “Unite and be of help to one an¬
other,” or “Cleanse yourselves of the faults that have
crept into your morals.” Nor are we saying, “Serve
your family and your country,” or any such slogans
that get lost in the wind. We are teaching that the
changing of the self requires more than a leader’s
advice, or a sultan’s order, or a magician’s magic, or
a saint’s miracles. Rather, it takes place, as we’ve
said, through the preparation of young people ready
to meet the requirements of a changing society.
This is the natural, long-term secret—one which
is surrounded in difficulties. But the easiest of all
difficulties is the one that ends in victory and suc¬
cess. And the shortest path is the one that delivers
you to your goal.
5
Bahithat al-Badiya
A Lecture in the Club of the Umma Party
Malak Hifni Nasif (Egypt, 1886-19 18), who used the pseudonym Bahithat al-Badiya (Seeker
in the Desert), was bom in Cairo into a literary family. Her father, who had studied at al-
Azhar with Muhammad ‘Abduh (see chapter 3), encouraged his daughter's education.
She graduated from the first teacher training school for women in Egypt, the Saniyya
School, where she later taught. On Fndays she gave women's lectures at the Egyptian
University and elsewhere, which she published along with feminist essays in 1910. The
present selection was one of these lectures, delivered to hundreds of upper-class women,
and addressing some of the most sensitive social issues of the day: changing gender re¬
lations, the symbolic and practical implications of women’s garb, and the need for legal
change in women's status. The program listed at the end of the lecture formed the ker¬
nel of the more extensive set of demands that she sent in 1911 to the Egyptian Con¬
gress in Heliopolis, a meeting of (male) nationalists. Her life then took an abrupt turn
when she married a Bedouin chief, gave up teaching, and went to live with him in the
Fayyum oasis west of Cairo. She discovered he already had a wife—his cousin—and a
daughter he expected her to tutor. Some of the sufferings she experienced and obsen/ed
were expressed in her writings. In 1918, at the age of 32, she died of influenza. Her eu¬
logy was the first feminist speech delivered by Huda Sha'rawi (1879-1947), founder of
the Egyptian Feminist Union. 1
Ladies, I greet you as a sister who feels what you feel,
suffers what you suffer, and rejoices in what you
rejoice. I applaud your kindness in accepting the in¬
vitation to this talk, where I seek reform. I hope to
succeed, but if I fail, remember that I am one of you,
and that as human beings we both succeed and fail.
Anyone who differs with me or wishes to make a
comment is welcome to express her views at the end
of my talk.
Our meeting today is not simply for getting ac¬
quainted or for displaying our finery, but is a seri¬
ous meeting. I wish to seek agreement on an approach
we can take, and to examine our shortcomings in
order to correct them. Complaints about both women
and men are rife. Which side is right? Complaints and
grumbling are not reform. I don’t believe a sick per¬
son is cured by continual moaning. An Arab prov¬
erb says there is no smoke without fire. The English
philosopher, Herbert Spencer [1820-1903], says that
opinions that appear erroneous to us are not totally
wrong, but there must be an element of truth in them.
There is some truth in our claims and in those of men.
At the moment there is a semi-feud between us and
men because of the low level of agreement between
us. Men blame the discord on our poor upbringing
and haphazard education, while we claim it is due to
men’s arrogance and pride. This mutual blame which
Bahithat al-Badiya, “A Lecture in the Club of the Umma
Party,” translated from Arabic by Ali Badran and Margot
Badran, in Margot Badran and Miriam Cooke, eds., Opening
the Gates: A Century of Arab Feminist Writing (Blooming¬
ton: Indiana University Press, 1990J, pp. 228-238, Speech
delivered in 1909 and first published in 1910. Introduction
adapted from the same volume, pp. 134, 227.
1. Soha Abdel Kader, Egyptian Women in a Changing
Society, 1899-1987 (Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner, 1987),
pp. 64-68; Leila Ahmed. Women and Gender in Islam (New
Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1992), pp. 179-185;
Margot Badran. Feminists, Islam and Nation: Gender and the
Making of Modem Egypt (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton Univer¬
sity Press, 1995); Beth Baron, The Women’s Awakening in
Egypt (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1994);
‘Abd al-Muta‘al Muhammad Jabri, al-Muslima al-'asriya
'inda Bahithat al-Badiya (The Contemporary Muslim
Woman, in the View of Bahithat al-Badiya ) (Cairo. Egypt:
Dar al-Ansar, 1976); May Ziyada, Bahithat al-Badiya
(Bahithat al-Badiya ) (Cairo, Egypt: Matba'at al-Muqtataf,
1920).
70
A LECTURE IN THE CLUB OF THE UMMA PARTY 71
has deepened the antagonism between the sexes is
something to be regretted and feared. God did not
create man and woman to hate each other, but to love
each other and to live together so the world would
be populated. If men live alone in one part of the
world and women are isolated in another, both will
vanish in time.
Men say when we become educated we shall push
them out of work and abandon the role for which God
has created us. But isn’t it rather men who have
pushed women out of work? Before, women used to
spin and to weave cloth for clothes for themselves
and their children, but men invented machines for
spinning and weaving and put women out of work.
In the past, women sewed clothes for themselves and
their households, but men invented the sewing ma¬
chine. The iron for these machines is mined by men,
and the machines themselves are made by men. Then
men took up the profession of tailoring and began to
make clothes for our men and children. Before,
women winnowed the wheat and ground flour on
grinding stones for the bread they used to make with
their own hands, sifting flour and kneading dough.
Then men established bakeries employing men. They
gave us rest, but at the same time pushed us out of
work. We or our female servants used to sweep our
houses with straw brooms, and then men invented
machines to clean that could be operated by a young
male servant. Poor women and servants used to fetch
water for their homes or the homes of employers, but
men invented pipes and faucets to carry water into
houses. Would reasonable women seeing water
pumped into a neighbor’s house be content to fetch
water from the river, which might be far away? Is it
reasonable for any civilized woman seeing bread
from the bakery, clean and soft, costing her nothing
more than a little money, to go and winnow wheat
and knead dough? She might be weak and unable to
trouble herself to prepare the wheat and dough, or she
might be poor and unable to hire servants or to work
alone without help. I think if men were in our place
they would have done what we did. No woman can
do all this work now, except women in the villages
where civilization has not arrived. Even those women
go to a mill instead of crushing wheat on the grind¬
ing stones. Instead of collecting water from the river,
they have pumps in their houses.
By what I have just said, I do not mean to deni¬
grate these useful inventions which do a lot of our
work. Nor do I mean to imply that they do not sat¬
isfy our needs. But I simply wanted to show that men
are the ones who started to push us out of work, and
that if we were to edge them out today, we would
only be doing what they have already done to us.
The question of monopolizing the workplace
comes down to individual freedom. One man wishes
to become a doctor, another a merchant. Is it right to
tell a doctor he must quit his profession and become
a merchant or vice versa? No. Each has the freedom
to do as he wishes. Since male inventors and work¬
ers have taken away a lot of our work, should we
waste our time in idleness or seek other work to oc¬
cupy us? Of course, we should do the latter. Work at
home now does not occupy more than half the day.
We must pursue an education in order to occupy the
other half of the day, but that is what men wish to
prevent us from doing under the pretext of taking
their jobs away. Obviously, I am not urging women
to neglect their home and children to go out and be¬
come lawyers or judges or railway engineers. But if
any of us wish to work in such professions, our per¬
sonal freedom should not be infringed. It might be
argued that pregnancy causes women to leave work,
but there are unmarried women, others who are bar¬
ren or have lost their husbands or are widowed or
divorced, or those whose husbands need their help
in supporting the family. It is not right that they
should be forced into lowly jobs. These women might
like to become teachers or doctors with the same
academic qualifications. Is it just to prevent women
from doing what they believe is good for themselves
and their support? If pregnancy impedes work out¬
side the house, it also impedes work inside the house.
Furthermore, how many able-bodied men have not
become sick from time to time and have had to stop
work?
Men say to us categorically, “You women have
been created for the house and we have been created
to be breadwinners.” Is this a God-given dictate?
How are we to know this, since no holy book has
spelled it out? Political economy calls for a division
of labor, but if women enter the learned professions
it does not upset the system. The division of labor is
merely a human creation. We still witness people like
the Nubians whose men sew clothes for themselves
and the household, while the women work in the
fields. Some women even climb palm trees to har¬
vest the dates. Women in villages in both Upper and
Lower Egypt help their men till the land and plant
crops. Some women do the fertilizing, haul crops.
11 Bahithat al-Badiya
lead animals, draw water for irrigation, and other
chores. You may have observed that women in the
villages work as hard as the strongest men, and we
see that their children are strong and healthy.
Specialized work for each sex is a matter of con¬
vention. It is not mandatory. We women are now
unable to do hard work because we have not been
accustomed to it. If the city woman had not been
prevented from doing hard work, she would have
been as strong as the man. Isn’t the country woman
like her city sister? Why then is the former in better
health and stronger than the latter? Do you have any
doubt that a woman from Minufiya [a town in the
Egyptian Delta] would be able to beat the strongest
man from al-Ghuriya [a section of Cairo] in a wres¬
tling match? If men say to us that we have been cre¬
ated weak, we say to them, “No, it is you who made
us weak through the path you made us follow.” After
long centuries of enslavement by men, our minds
rusted and our bodies weakened. Is it right that they
accuse us of being created weaker than them in mind
and body? Women may not have to their credit great
inventions, but women have excelled in learning and
the arts and politics. Some have exceeded men in
courage and valor, such as Khawla bint al-Azwar al-
Kindi [a companion of the Prophet, died circa 655],
who impressed ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab [second caliph,
634-644] with her bravery and skill in fighting when
she went to Syria to free her brother held captive by
the Byzantines. Joan of Arc [circa 1412-1431], who
led the French army after its defeat by the English,
encouraged the French to continue fighting and val¬
iantly waged war against those who fought her na¬
tion. I am not giving examples of women who be¬
came queens and were adept in politics such as
Catherine, Queen of Russia [reigned 1762-1796];
Isabel, Queen of Spain [reigned 1474-1504]; Eliza¬
beth, Queen of England [reigned 1558-1603];
Cleopatra [queen of Egypt, reigned 51-30 b.c.];
Shajarat al-Durr, the mother of Turan Shah [reigned
1249], who governed Egypt [1250-1257]. Our op¬
ponents may say that their rule was carried out by
their ministers, who are men, but while that might be
true under constitutional rule, it is not true under
absolute monarchies.
When someone says to us, “That’s enough edu¬
cation,” it discourages us and pushes us backward.
We are still new at educating our daughters. While
there is no fear now of our competing with men.
because we are still in the first stage of education and
our Oriental habits still do not allow us to pursue
much study, men can rest assured in their jobs. As
long as they see seats in the schools of law, engineer¬
ing, medicine, and at university unoccupied by us,
men can relax, because what they fear is distant. If
one of us shows eagerness to complete her education
in one of these schools, I am sure she will not be
given a job. She is doing that to satisfy her desire for
learning or for recognition. As long as we do not
work in law or become employed by the government,
would our only distraction from raising children be
reading a book or writing a letter? I think that is im¬
possible. No matter how much a mother has been
educated, or in whatever profession she works, this
would not cause her to forget her children nor to lose
her maternal instinct. On the contrary, the more en¬
lightened she becomes, the more aware she is of her
responsibilities. Haven’t you seen ignorant women
and peasant women ignore their crying child for
hours? Were these women also occupied in prepar¬
ing legal cases or in reading and writing?
Nothing irritates me more than when men claim
they do not wish us to work because they wish to
spare us the burden. We do not want condescension,
we want respect. They should replace the first with
the second.
Men blame any shortcomings we may have on our
education, but in fact our upbringing is to blame.
Learning and upbringing are two separate things—
only in religion are the two connected. This is dem¬
onstrated by the fact that many men and women who
are well educated are lacking in morals. Some people
think that good upbringing means kissing the hands
of women and standing with arms properly crossed.
Good upbringing means helping people respect them¬
selves and others. Education has not spoiled the
morals of our girls, but poor upbringing, which is the
duty of the home, not the school, has done this. We
have to redouble our efforts to reform ourselves and
the young. This cannot happen in a minute as some
might think. It is unfair to put the blame on the
schools. The problem lies with the family. We must
improve this situation.
One of our shortcomings is our reluctance to take
advice from each other. When someone says some¬
thing, jealousy and scorn usually come into play. We
also are too quick to ridicule and criticize each other
over nothing, and we are vain and arrogant.
A LECTURE IN THE CLUB OF THE UMMA PARTY 73
Men criticize the way we dress in the street. They
have a point, because we have exceeded the bounds
of custom and propriety. We claim we are veiling,
but we are neither properly covered nor unveiled. I
do not advocate a return to the veils of our grand¬
mothers, because it can rightly be called being bur¬
ied alive, not hijab, correct covering. The woman
used to spend her whole life within the walls of her
house, not going out into the street except when she
was carried to her grave. I do not, on the other hand,
advocate unveiling, like Europeans, and mixing with
men, because they are harmful to us.
Nowadays the lower half of our attire is a skirt that
does not conform to our standards of modesty (hijab),
while the upper half—like age, the more it advances,
the more it is shortened. Our former garment was one
piece. When the woman wrapped herself in it, her
figure was totally hidden. The wrap shrunk little by
little, but it was still wide enough to conceal the
whole body. Then we artfully began to shrink the
waist and lower the neck and finally two sleeves were
added and the garment clung to the back and was
worn only with a corset. We tied back our headgear
so that more than half the head, including the ears,
was visible and the flowers and ribbons ornament¬
ing the hair could be seen. Finally, the face veil be¬
came more transparent than an infant’s heart. The
purpose of the izar [long outer garment] is to cover
the body as well as our dress and jewelry underneath,
which God has commanded us not to display.
[Qur’an, Sura 24, Verse 31] Does our present izar ,
which has virtually become a “dress” showing the
bosom, waist, and derriere, conform with this pre¬
cept? Moreover, some women have started wearing
it in colors—blue, brown, and red. In my opinion, we
should call it a dress with a clown’s cap, which in
fact it is. I think going out without it is more mod¬
est, because at least eyes are not attracted to it.
Imams [religious leaders] have differed on the
question of hijab. If the get-ups of some women are
meant to be a way to leave the home without the izar,
it would be all right if they unveiled their faces but
covered their hair and their bodies. I believe the best
practice for outdoors is to cover the head with a scarf
and the body with a dress of the kind Europeans call
cache poussiere, a dust coat, to cover the body right
down to the heels, and with sleeves long enough to
reach the wrist. This is being done now in Istanbul,
as I am told, when Turkish women go out to neigh¬
borhood shops. But who will guarantee that we will
not shorten it and tighten it until we transform it into
another dress? In that instance, the road to reform
would narrow in front of us.
If we had been raised from childhood to go un¬
veiled, and if our men were ready for it, I would ap¬
prove of unveiling for those who want it. But the
nation is not ready for it now. Some of our prudent
women do not fear to mix with men, but we have to
place limits on those who are less prudent, because
we are quick to imitate and seldom find our authen¬
ticity in the veil. Don’t you see that diamond tiaras
were originally meant for queens and princesses, and
now they are worn by singers and dancers?
The way we wear the izar now imitates the dress
of Europeans, but we have outdone them in display
(. tabarruj). The European woman wears the simplest
dress she has when she is outside, and wears whatever
she wishes at home or when invited to soirees. But our
women are just the opposite. In front of her husband
she wears a simple tunic, and when she goes out she
wears her best clothes, loads herself down with jew¬
elry, and pours bottles of perfume on herself... Not
only this, but she makes a wall out of her face, a wall
that she paints various colors. She walks swaying like
bamboo in a way that entices passersby, or at least they
pretend to be enticed. I am sure that most of these
showy women do this without bad intentions, but how
can the onlooker understand good intentions when
appearances do not indicate it?
Veiling should not prevent us from breathing fresh
air or going out to buy what we need if no one can
buy it for us. It must not prevent us from gaining an
education, nor cause our health to deteriorate. When
we have finished our work and feel restless, and if
our house does not have a spacious garden, why
shouldn’t we go to the outskirts of the city and take
the fresh air that God has created for everyone, and
not just put in boxes exclusively for men? But we
should be prudent and not take promenades alone,
and we should avoid gossip. We should not saunter
moving our heads right and left. If my father or hus¬
band will not choose clothes I like and bring them to
the house, why can’t he take me with him to select
what I need, or let me buy what I want?
If I cannot find anyone but a man to teach me,
should I opt for ignorance or for unveiling in front of
that man, along with my sisters who are being edu¬
cated? Nothing would force me to unveil in the pres-
74 Bahithat al-Badiya
ence of the teacher. I can remain veiled and still bene¬
fit from the teacher. Are we better in Islam than
Sayyida Nafisa [saintly scholar, 762-824] and Sayyida
Sukayna [bint al-Husayn, great-granddaughter of the
Prophet, died 736]—God’s blessings be upon them—
who used to gather with ‘ulama’ [religious scholars]
and poets. If illness causes me to consult a doctor, and
there is no woman doctor, should I abandon myself
to sickness, which might be light but could become
complicated through neglect, or should I seek help
from a doctor who could cure me?
The imprisonment in the home of the Egyptian
woman of the past is detrimental, while the current
freedom of the Europeans is excessive. I cannot find
abetter model than today’s Turkish woman. She falls
between the two extremes and does not violate what
Islam prescribes. She is a good example of decorum
and modesty.
I have heard that some of our high officials are
teaching their girls European dancing and acting. I
consider both despicable—a detestable crossing of
boundaries and a blind imitation of Europeans. Cus¬
toms should not be abandoned except when they are
harmful. European customs should not be taken up
by Egyptians except when they are appropriate and
practical. What good is there for us in women and
men holding each other’s waists dancing, or daugh¬
ters appearing on stage before audiences acting with
bare bosoms in love scenes? This is contrary to Islam,
and a moral threat we must fight as much as we can.
We must show our disdain for the few Muslim women
who do these things, who otherwise would be encour¬
aged by our silence to contaminate others.
On the subject of customs and veiling, I would like
to remind you of something that causes us great un¬
happiness—the question of engagement and marriage.
Most sensible people in Egypt believe it is necessary
for fiances to meet and speak with each other before
their marriage. It is wise, and the Prophet himself,
peace be upon him and his followers, did not do other¬
wise. It is a practice in all nations, including Egypt,
except among city people. Some people advocate the
European practice of allowing the engaged pair to get
together for a period of time so that they can come to
know each other, but I am opposed to this and am
convinced this is rooted in fallacy. The result of this
getting together is that they would come to love each
other, but when someone loves another, that person
does not see the faults of that person and would not
be able to evaluate that person’s morals. The two get
married on the basis of false love and without direc¬
tion, and soon they start to quarrel and the harmony
evaporates. In my view, the two people should see
each other and speak together after their engagement
and before signing the marriage contract. The woman
should be accompanied by her father, or an uncle or a
brother, and she should wear simple clothing. Some
might protest that one or two or more meetings is not
enough for the two persons to get to know each other’s
character, but it is enough to tell if they are attracted
to each other. However, anyone with good intuition
can detect a person’s moral character in the eyes and
in movements and repose and sense if a person is false,
reckless, and the like. As for a person’s past and other
things, one should investigate by talking with acquain¬
tances, neighbors, servants, and others. If we are afraid
that immoral young men would use this opportunity
to see young women without intending marriage, her
guardian should probe the behavior of the man to as¬
certain how serious he is before allowing him to see
his daughter or the young woman for whom he is re¬
sponsible. What is the good of education if one can¬
not abandon a custom that is not rooted in religion,
and that is harmful. We have all seen family happi¬
ness destroyed because of this old betrothal practice.
By not allowing men to see their prospective
wives following their engagement, we cause Egyp¬
tian men to seek European women in marriage.
They marry European servants and working-class
women, thinking they would be happy with them
rather than daughters of pashas and beys [high of¬
ficials and nobles] hidden away in “a box of
chance.” If we do not solve this problem, we shall
become subject to occupation by women of the
West. We shall suffer double occupation, one by
men and the other by women. The second will be
worse than the first, because the first occurred
against our will, but we shall have invited the sec¬
ond by our own actions. It is not improbable, as
well, that these wives will bring their fathers, broth¬
ers, cousins, and friends to live near them, and they
would close the doors of work in front of our men.
Most Egyptian men who have married European
women suffer from the foreign habits and extrava¬
gance of their wives. The European woman thinks
she is of a superior race to the Egyptian and bosses
her husband around after marriage. When the Eu¬
ropean woman marries an Egyptian, she becomes a
spendthrift, while she would be thrifty if she were
married to a Westerner.
A LECTURE IN THE CLUB OF THE UMMA PARTY 75
If the man thinks the upper-class Egyptian wife
is deficient and lacking in what her Western sister
has, why doesn’t the husband gently guide his wife?
Husband and wife should do their utmost to please
each other. When our young men go to Europe to
study modern sciences, it should be to the benefit,
not the detriment, of Egypt. As these men get an
education and profit themselves, they should also
bring benefit to their compatriots. They should bring
to their country that which will profit it and dispense
with whatever is foreign, as much as possible. If a
national manufacturer of silk visits the factories of
Europe and admires their efficiency, he should buy
machinery that would do work rapidly, rather than
introduce the same European-made product, because
if he does he will endanger his own good product.
If we pursue everything Western we shall destroy
our own civilization, and a nation that has lost its
civilization grows weak and vanishes. Our youth
claim that they bring European women home because
they find them more sophisticated than Egyptian
women. By the same token, they should bring Euro¬
pean students and workers to Egypt because they are
superior to our own. The reasoning is the same. What
would be the result if this happens? If an Egyptian
wife travels to Europe and sees the children there with
better complexions and more beautiful than children
in Egypt, would it be right that she would leave her
children and replace them with Western children, or
would she do her best to make them beautiful and
make them resemble as much as possible that which
she admired in those other children? If the lowliest
Western woman marrying an Egyptian is disowned
by her family, shall we be content with her when she
also takes the place of one of our best women, and
the husband becomes an example for other young
men? I am the first to admire the activities of the
Western woman, and her courage, and I am the first
to respect those among them who deserve respect, but
respect for others should not make us overlook the
good of the nation. Public interest is above admira¬
tion. In many of our ways we follow the views of our
men. Let them show us what they want. We are ready
to follow their views, on condition that their views
do not do injustice to us nor trespass on our rights.
Our beliefs and actions have been a great cause
of the lesser respect that men accord us. How can a
sensible man respect a woman who believes in magic,
superstition, and the blessing of the dead, and who
allows women peddlers and washerwomen, or even
devils, to have authority over her? Can he respect a
woman who speaks only about the clothes of her
neighbor and the jewelry of her friend and the furni¬
ture of a bride? This is added to the notion imprinted
in a man’s mind that woman is weaker and less in¬
telligent than he is. If we fail to do something about
this, it means we think our condition is satisfactory.
Is our condition satisfactory? If it is not, how can we
better it in the eyes of men? Good upbringing and
sound education would elevate us in the eyes of men.
We should get a sound education, not merely acquire
the trappings of a foreign language and rudiments of
music. Our education should also include home man¬
agement, health care, and child care. If we eliminate
immodest behavior on the street and prove to our hus¬
bands through good behavior and fulfilment of du¬
ties that we are human beings with feelings, no less
human than they are, and we do not allow them under
any condition to hurt our feelings or fail to respect
us—if we do all this, how can a just man despise us?
As for the unjust man, it would have been better for
us not to accept marriage to him.
We shall advance when we give up idleness. The
work of most of us at home is lounging on cushions
all day or going out to visit other women. How does
the woman who knows how to read occupy her lei¬
sure time? Only in reading novels. Has she read
books about health, or books through which she can
profit herself and others? Being given over to idle¬
ness or luxury has given us weak constitutions and
pale complexions. We have to find work to do at
home. At a first glance, one can see that the work¬
ing classes have better health and more energy and
more intelligent children. The children of the middle
and lower classes are. almost all of them, in good
health and have a strong constitution, while most
of the children of the elite are sick or frail and prone
to illness, despite the care lavished on them by their
parents. On the other hand, lower-class children are
greatly neglected by their parents. Work causes poi¬
sons to be eliminated from the blood and strength¬
ens the muscles and gives energy.
Now I shall turn to the path we should follow. If
I had the right to legislate, I would decree:
1. Teaching girls the Qur’an and the correct sunna
[practice of the Prophet].
2. Providing primary and secondary school edu¬
cation for girls, and compulsory preparatory
school education for all.
Bahithat al-Badiya
3. Instructing girls on the theory and practice of
home economics, health, first aid, and childcare.
4. Setting a quota for females in medicine and edu¬
cation so they can serve the women of Egypt.
5. Allowing women to study any other advanced
subjects they wish without restriction.
6. Bringing up girls from infancy stressing pa¬
tience, honesty, work, and other virtues.
7. Adhering to the shari‘a [Islamic law] concern¬
ing betrothal and marriage, and not permitting
any woman and man to marry without first meet¬
ing each other in the presence of the father or
male relative of the bride.
8. Adopting the veil and outdoor dress of the Turk¬
ish women of Istanbul.
9. Maintaining the best interests of the country and
dispensing with foreign goods and people as
much as possible.
10. Making it incumbent upon our brothers, the men
of Egypt, to implement this program.
6
Muhammad Rashid Rida
Renewal, Renewing, and Renewers
Muhammad Rashid Rida (Lebanon-Egypt, 1865-1935) was a prolific writer and one of
the most important figures in Islamic modernism. Bom in Tripoli, Rida attended a school
established by Shaykh Husayn al-Jisr (Lebanon, 1845-1909), who believed in the need to
combine religious and modern education. Rida therefore acquired a fair knowledge of
modem sciences and European languages, while studying also the works of Abu Hamid
al-Ghazzali (1058-1 III) and Ibn Taymiyya (1263-1328), which reinforced his reformist
and antimystical tendencies. Rida was greatly influenced by the reformist message ofSayyid
Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (chapter I I) and Muhammad ‘Abduh (chapter 3), and he moved
to Egypt in 1897 to join ‘Abduh, becoming one of‘Abduh's closest disciples and his biog¬
rapher. Rida's monthly periodical, al-Manar (The Beacon), which he published from I 898
to 1935, was widely read and highly influential, disseminating the ideas of Islamic reform
throughout the Islamic world. Like Afghani and 'Abduh, Rida believed in the compatibil¬
ity of Islam and reason, science, and modernity. He advocated return to the original sources
of Islam and the reinterpretation of the Qur’an to meet modern demands. Yet Rida was
critical of some of 'Abduh's disciples who took modernist ideas to secular and liberal
conclusions. He rejected the growing attempts to subordinate Islam to modernity and
Westernization and in his later years tilted toward religious conservatism. The speech
translated here, from late in his life, reflects Rida's vision of Islamic renewal and his con¬
cerns about the increased secularization of Muslim society, 1
Part I
This is a lecture the publisher of this periodical [al-
Manar, or The Beacon] delivered at the Royal Insti¬
tute of Geography at the invitation of the Society of
the Oriental League on a Ramadan night in the year
1348 [early 1930]. A large audience of scholars,
writers, students of al-Azhar [University], outstand¬
ing students of the high schools, and virtuous women
attended it, as well as some eminent European
Orientalists. They were asked for their opinion after
delivering it and attested to its moderation.
Muhammad Rashid Rida, “al-Tajdid wa al-tajaddud wa al-
mujaddidun” (Renewal, Renewing, and Renewers), al-Manar
(The Beacon ), Cairo, Egypt, volume 31, number 10, July 1931,
pp. 770-777; volume 32, number 1, October 1931, pp. 49-60;
volume 32, number 3, March 1932, pp. 226-231. Translation
from Arabic and introduction by Emad Eldin Shahin.
1. Charles C. Adams, Islam and Modernism in Egypt: A
Study of the Modern Reform Movement Inaugurated by
In the Name of God, the Beneficent,
the Merciful
The Society of the Oriental League has entrusted me
to deliver a lecture tonight on the issue of “Renewal,
Renewing, and Renewers.” My colleague in its board
of directors. Doctor Mansur Fahmi [1886-1959], has
kindly mentioned its title to you. I appeal to you to
overlook and forgive any shortcoming. I begin with
an introduction of the topic and what needs to be
explained and examined.
Muhammad ‘Abduh (London; Oxford University Press,
1933); Shakib Arslan, Al-Sayyid Rashid Rida wa ikha'
arba'ina Sana (Rashid Rida and Forty Years of Fraternity)
(Damascus, Syria: Matba'at Ibn Zaydun. 1937); Albert
Hourani, Arabic Thought in the Liberal Age: 1798-1939
(London: Oxford University Press, 1970), pp. 222-244;
Emad Eldin Shahin, Through Muslim Eyes: M. Rashid Rida
and the West (Hemdon, Va.: International Institute of Islamic
Thought, 1993).
77
78 Muhammad Rashid Rida
Introductory Note on Our Need for
Renewal in All Aspects
In a time that is afflicted by ideological, intellectual,
political. Communist, and Bolshevik upheavals; in
a time that is strained by religious, literary, and so¬
cial chaos; in a time that is threatened by women’s
revolution, the violation of marital vows, the disin¬
tegration of the family, and the bonds of kinship; in
a time in which heresy and unfettered promiscuity
have erupted, as well as attacks on the nation’s reli¬
gion, language, and values, and its customs, dress,
and origins, nothing remains stable to raise our
youths and teach them respect.
In such a time, which I have described briefly, and
which you know even better, the concepts of renewal,
renewing, and renewers have become widely spread
amongst us. Truly, we are in a dire need for renewal
and renewers. Anything that could preserve our na¬
tional character and religious heritage, and promote
us in the paths of civic advancement has been re¬
voked and corroded. All of our historical origins, the
true religion, our blossoming civilization, and great
empire, we have worn out and depreciated, even
abandoned and forgotten. In our attempts to acquire
the novel and borrow the modem we have only clung
to the fringes and have never been able to reproduce
it fully. What we have of the old and the modern is a
shell of imitation, like the shell of an almond or a
walnut that lies under the outer wooden layer; it is
useless in itself and cannot preserve the core.
If our al-Azhar and religious institutions are in
need of reform to renew the guidance of religion,
our public and private schools are in even greater
need of reform to renew our civilization, regain our
independence, and fulfill all our interests. The cor¬
ruption of education and socialization in them in¬
cludes two dimensions: positive and negative. Our
complaint against defects in the religious institu¬
tions is almost entirely negative, and we will explain
the harm later. People of vision and understanding
in this nation complain about both and propose one
reform after the other.
We need an independent renewal like that of
Japan to promote our economic, military, and politi¬
cal interests and develop our agricultural, industrial,
and commercial wealth. With this renewal we shall
become a dignified umma [Islamic community] and
a strong state, while preserving our nation’s religion,
culture, laws, and language, and its national charac¬
ter of dress, good traditions, and values. [There is]
no need for an imitative renewal like that of the Ot¬
toman state, which ended in the disintegration of its
vast sultanate, then in its termination and eradication
from the world geographic atlas. Nor [do we need] a
renewal like that of the Egyptian state, which started
independently during the reign of Muhammad ‘Ali
the Great [ruler of Egypt, 1805-1849], then turned
to imitation and ended with occupation and the loss
of independence. If it had adhered to its initial plan,
Egypt would have become a great sultanate consist¬
ing of the eastern part of Africa and the western part
of Asia. It would have restored the glory of Arab
civilization, and would have been charged with the
leadership of the Muslim umma. It is still qualified
to do so. All that it needs is to prepare, to exert the
necessary efforts, to seek this goal when the time is
ripe, and to achieve it with a worthy leader. On the
throne today there is a king [Fu'ad, reigned 1922-
1936] who demonstrates the willingness to do so, as
everyone knows.
We need this glorious renewal, one that combines
the modem and the old. We need renewers of civili¬
zation, like Muhammad ‘Ali the Great, and renewers
of knowledge and wisdom, such as Muhammad
‘Abduh [Egyptian scholar, 1849-1905; see chapter 3]
and Jamal al-Din [al-Afghani, Iranian pan-Islamic
activist, 1838-1897; see chapter 11 ]—not the renewal
of heresy and promiscuity, laxity and profligacy, es¬
pousing depravity in the name of the liberal arts [lit¬
erally “naked arts”] and discouraging virtue under the
pretext of freedom, liberation of the Oriental woman,
and imitation of Western civilization. All these vices
are old, not new, as known to those who are familiar
with the history of Athens and Rome and other capi¬
tals of the ancient peoples. They weakened their states
and eroded their independence. “And when We de¬
stroy a population, We send Our command to (warn)
its people living a life of ease; and when they disobey,
the sentence against them is justified, and We destroy
them utterly.” [Qur’an, Sura 17, Verse 16] [This
means:] We order them with obedience and virtue, but
they defied our order and pursued disobedience and
depravity, preferring their own lust over the public
interest. Therefore they deserved our statement, “Ver¬
ily We shall annihilate these wicked people”; [Sura 14,
Verse 13] our statement, “We would never have de¬
stroyed cities if their inhabitants were not given to
wickedness”; [Sura 28, Verse 59] our statement. “Shall
any perish but the ungodly?”; [Sura 46, Verse 35] our
RENEWAL, RENEWING, AND RENEWERS 79
statement, “Your Lord would not surely destroy com¬
munities so long as the people are righteous.” [Sura
11, Verse 117] This means that He [God] will not
destroy them because of transgression on His part,
when they are righteous in their deeds.
The modernizing reforms of Muhammad ‘Ali the
Great have become known, and the religious, politi¬
cal, and social reform of ‘Abduh and Afghani are no
longer unknown. His Majesty, seated on the throne
of Muhammad ‘Ali, as well as the princes and the
nobility of Muhammad ‘Ali’s family, are the stron¬
gest basis for the military and civilizational renewal
of the nation and the state, while preserving the
nation's components and character, if the nation so
requests. Muhammad ‘Ali’s folded turban, his wide
garment, the garb of his officials and that of the stu¬
dents on his scientific missions [to Europe], did not
preclude them from engaging in modernization, re¬
viving the sciences, and achieving glorious accom¬
plishments. But Amanullah Khan [mler of Afghani¬
stan, 1919-1929] lost his throne and shed the blood
of his people in his attempts at imitative renewal by
donning the [European] hat, adorning his wife, and
shaving the beards of his statesmen!
Jamal al-Din [al-Afghani] and Muhammad ‘Abduh
have [formed] a scientific, rational, and reformist
group, capable of following their footsteps and pro¬
ceeding with their reforms insofar as the umma is will¬
ing to respond to them. The umma has seen the bril¬
liance of one of them in political leadership, 2 which
was inconceivable before [the umma] became ready
to rise up with him and acknowledge his stature. None¬
theless, destructive individuals have assumed the
leadership of renewal and monopolized the title of
renewers. They urge the nation to abandon the guid¬
ance of religion, take off the apparel of virtue, take
pride in the donning of the hat, allow the mixture of
women and men in dancing [halls], swimming, seclu¬
sion, and travel, permit drinking and all types of sin¬
fulness that follow. They criticize woman, who makes
it her utmost concern in life to prepare herself to per¬
form well what God has created her for, distinguish¬
ing her over man: that is, to be a good and virtuous
spouse, an affectionate and educating mother, and an
organized and frugal head of the household. They call
the household her prison, even if it is like a garden
palace, and the husband her jailer, even if he con-
2. Sa‘d Pasha Zaghlul [Egyptian nationalist leader, 1857—
1927],
siders her as an angel in goodly pavilions. They en¬
tice her to disobey and disregard him, to allow whom¬
ever she pleases to enter his home, and to enter the
home of whoever she likes without [her husband’s]
permission and approval. They also tempt her with
positions in the government and attorneys’ offices, and
urge her not to consider such impediments as the bur¬
dens of pregnancy and labor, breast-feeding and nurs¬
ing. Some even say that she is fit for wars and fight¬
ing, leading land and naval armies, marine and air
fleets. [...]
They also entice youths with heresy and praise the
pursuit of lust, trying to turn them and women into
soldiers blindly obedient to their leaders. Advice and
preaching are useless once they have deviated from
religion. No advice can be heard during the pursuit
of moral chaos and whims. It is quite sufficient
[proof] of moral degradation and intellectual decay
to concede [to their claim] that the old is repulsive
and must be abandoned and despised just because it
is old, and to deride those who would preserve [the
past] by calling them reactionary.
A horde of heretics in this great country are at
present attempting to assume this honorable title [of
renewer]. None of them deserves this title, not for
excellence in knowledge or wisdom, guidance or
virtue, or in revealing unknown truths; not for initi¬
ating practices useful to the umma in preserving its
true nature, developing its wealth, or restoring its
glory. (I seek forgiveness from God because restor¬
ing the nation’s glory, with its conquests and civili¬
zation, is considered by them as reactionary, and they
despise those who call for that.)
All their wares in this marketplace are but chat¬
ter, sophistry, audacity in mixing right with wrong,
and insolence in criticizing their opponents or crit¬
ics. They engage in flagrant slander, not correct evi¬
dence, for truth has no sanctity for them, and they
praise the extremist Turks who have tossed Islam
behind them, destroying all the cornerstones of free¬
dom: freedom of religion, opinion, speech, writing,
dress, and work—[the very freedoms] that are glori¬
fied by the leaders of knowledge and modem civili¬
zation whom they claim to be following. Had it not
been for the excessiveness of the Egyptian govern¬
ment, these pretenders would not have dared to voice
these heretic calls to destroy [the government’s] re¬
ligion, values, and traditions. Their praise of the ex¬
cessiveness of the Turkish heretics is not novel. It
began with an earlier generation, and its product in
80 Muhammad Rashid Rida
this generation has been the extinction of the Otto¬
man sultanate, which was the greatest sultanate in
Europe, Asia, and Africa. Nothing remained of it
except for a small, poor republic, less in number,
affluence, knowledge, and civilization than the king¬
dom of Egypt, which was once a province of this
sultanate. Now [Turks] want [Egypt] to follow [the
Turkish state’s] footsteps—its heresy and disavowal
of the guidance of religion—so that [Egypt] will not
be able to replace [Turkey] in what it is now quali¬
fied to do, that is, assume the leadership of 400 mil¬
lion Muslims [around the world].
When similarly false renewers deceived Amanullah
Khan, and he tried to imitate the present Turkish state,
they showered him with praise for unveiling women
and forcing his people to wear hats. His heretical re¬
newal ignited fires of revolution in his country against
him and his government. He was forced to flee and
abdicate his mle. There has been no real renewal in
Afghanistan, no inclination for [building] schools, a
military system, industry, and the like, though this
process started in the last century during the reign of
‘Abd al-Rahman [Khan, reigned 1880-1901].
Since the last century, the Turks have embarked
on all the earthly renewal that the heretics called for.
Further, Islam has neither prevented the evils of re¬
newal, which it condemns, nor [opposed] the posi¬
tive aspects, which it requires. [The Turks] have not
pursued an independent path of renewal, like Japan,
which preserved its religious and national character.
They were imitators, and, therefore, they clashed with
the imitators among the clerical scholars. They
should have combined religious renewal and earthly
renewal, the same way Europe has done with reli¬
gious reformation and modernization.
Egypt preceded the Turks in this earthly renewal.
The clerical scholars neither opposed nor helped [the
process,] because renewal was carried out by one
side. Had it been carried out by both sides, it would
have been accomplished in a short time, as I will
explain later.
The false renewers here do not consider existing
conditions, because they imitate the heretics of Eu¬
rope in their hostility to religious scholars. This blind
imitation has made them disincline [people from re¬
ligion], casting doubt on the doctrines of religion,
criticizing its rules and regulations, undermining its
scholars, claiming that science and philosophy have
annulled it, accusing its ‘ulama ’ [religious scholars]
of being an insurmountable obstacle to the progress
of the umma , an obstacle that must be removed just
as dirt is removed from the road. Had they called for
practical reform in the name of renewal, and then
found resistance from religious scholars, they would
have been justified.
The Alleged Renewal of the Heretics
Constitutes a New Division of the Nation
This so-called renewal is almost becoming a real
renewal of divisive strife. This could be worse than
the divisions of ethnic and national extremisms and
of political parties. The presence of a new party ap¬
pears to complete the roster of divisions. [This party,]
in imitation of the heretics of Europe and its liber¬
als, is hostile to religion and despises the devout, who
constitute the majority of the nation. ‘Ulama’, ora¬
tors, and writers urge people to respond to this party,
to declare their hostility and resistance to it. Leaders
and elites are forced to call upon the government to
prevent members of this party from pronouncing evil.
This took place precisely as a result of the negative
influence of someone who declared unheard-of rights
for women at the University of Egypt. 3 Similarly,
someone at the American University [in Cairo], in a
lecture which he published and distributed, argued
the necessity of equality between men and women,
even in divorce and inheritance. 4 I heard the Friday
prayer speaker, in the mosque where I pray, pity Islam
and urge the fasting worshipers to defend the Qur'an,
which its enemies scorned and accused of transgres¬
sions against women, and so on, after some of the
notables 5 renounced that lecture and the newspapers
unanimously criticized such nonsense.
This sort of strife occurred in Europe during the
Middle Ages, which were the worst centuries for
Europeans. There was a dark sedition, during which
much blood was shed in the conflict between the free¬
dom of knowledge and government on the one hand,
and the authority of religion and church on the other.
Recently, a similar situation took place in Afghani-
3. Mr. Mahmud ‘Azmi [1889-1954], whom we defeated
in debate at the University, to judge by the support of the
audience and his own admission.
4. Doctor Fakhri Faraj Mikhail al-Qibti.
5. His Highness ‘Umar Pasha Tusun [1872-1944],
RENEWAL, RENEWING, AND RENEWERS 8
stan. However, I see the condition of Egypt as dif¬
ferent from that of Europe during these centuries and
that of present-day Afghans. We must repel this se¬
dition before it spreads, to prevent this conflict be¬
fore it escalates. This is exactly what I seek with this
lecture. I see it as the greatest task that I can perform
before the Society of the Oriental League, for the sake
of dear Egypt and the entire Orient. [. ..]
Part 2
All of creation is new. The absolute original is the
Creator, most glorified and exalted. Among the cre¬
ated, new and old are relative. Every old creature was
once new, and every new one will become old. As a
folk proverb says: “Whoever does not have a past
will not have a future.” This is a wise proverb that
the knowledgeable may understand in senses that the
common people cannot approach.
Renewal and renewing of the universe are among
the divine general laws, generating order in our world
and change and transformation in the phase of our
existence. They operate [today] just as they operated
for our parents and grandparents. “No change will
thou find in God’s way (of dealing): No turning off
wilt thou find in God’s way (of dealing).” [Qur’an,
Sura 35, Verse 43], [...]
What I stated in the introduction to a previous
lecture, on coeducational schools, may be appropri¬
ate to state here as a summary:
Renewing is a law of social association; renewal is
part of nature and habit. It is counterweighed by the
preservation of the old. Each has its place. There is
no contradiction or opposition between them,
provided that each is put in its place with no neglect
or excess. [. ..]
Part of renewal in human action is achieved by the
instinct of independence, which is opposite of
imitation, and the tendency for discovery and
invention. Without them, humans would be similar
to flocks of birds; their dwellings would not be more
advanced than bee hives and ant hills.
Types of Renewal and Their Necessity
Social, political, civic, and religious renewal is neces¬
sary for human societies, in accordance with their na¬
ture and level of readiness. They enable societies to
progress through the stages of civilization and ascend
on the paths of science and knowledge. Even divine
religion, which is based on the revelation of the wise
God, with His grace, to selected creatures whose holy
souls He prepared to receive it, has advanced along with
the nature of human societies in their progress from one
stage to another, until it was completed by Islam when
they reached the stage of maturity and independence.
Despite this completion, the narrators of hadilh [ac¬
counts of the Prophet] tell us that [Muhammad,] the Seal
of the Prophets, peace be upon them all, said, “God
sends to this nation at the beginning of every century
someone who renews its religion.” Narrated by Abu
Da’ud [al-Sijistani, died 889] in his Sunan [Hadilh Col¬
lection]; [Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah] al-Hakim [al-
Naysaburi, 933-1014] in his Mustadrak [Supplement];
[Ahmad ibn al-Husayn] al-Bayhaqi [994-1066] in al-
Ma'rifa [al-sunan. The Wisdom of the Collected
Hadith], and others from the hadith of Abu Hurayra
[companion of the Prophet, died 678]. [Jalal al-Din] al-
Suyuti [1445-1505] referred in his al-Jami‘ al-saghir
[The Lesser Collection] to its correctness. The renewal
of religion means renewing its guidance, clarifying its
truth and certitude, refuting the innovations and extrem¬
ism that its followers accrue, or their reluctance in up¬
holding it and following its rules in managing the in¬
terests of humans and the laws of society and
civilization. [... ] This is the meaning of renewal and
renewing, and it leads us [to conclude] that both the new
and the old have their place, and it is a matter of igno¬
rance to prefer one over the other in absolute terms. [...]
The True and Decisive Statement on
New and Old
The true statement on this topic is that humans at all
times need both the old and the new. In each there is
good and ill, benefit and harm. Some people by na¬
ture tilt more to one or the other, in accordance with
the nature of things and their type. Rarely is the new
preferred, because of its newness, except by children
and those women and men who are at their level. Ra¬
tional and independent people do not shun the old and
turn to the new unless there is a reason making it pref¬
erable, in accordance with the mle of logic. [. ..] A
rational person may prefer the new for a reason related
to its usefulness and utility, either in itself or for some¬
thing outside it, such as the economy, appropriateness,
patriotism, and nationalism.
82 Muhammad Rashid Rida
Preferring the National to the Foreign
Preferring all that is national, either new or old, is a
cornerstone of economic, political, and literary' life in
all vibrant nations, particularly the British, who be¬
came appalled by the spread of cheap German prod¬
ucts in their country. They formed several associations
to investigate means of prevention. I inquired in some
pharmacies in Berlin and Munich about a French
medication I usually carry during travel and keep back
home. [...] The answer I received was, “It is French,
it is French.” They never denied its existence, but only
gave as the reason [for its unavailability] that it was
made by the French, not the Germans. I had to substi¬
tute that medication with a German one, a better one
for that purpose. Had an Egyptian or Arab medication
existed, I would have preferred it.
With this kind of nationalism and patriotism, the
peoples of the West, faithful to their kind and devoted
to their nation, have advanced. They prefer their own
industries, commerce, laws, and other components and
characteristics of the nation, over that which belongs
to others. They preserve the regulations of the old
British judges and their legal decisions more than we
maintain the regulations that we believe to have been
revealed by God, most exalted, let alone the regula¬
tions deduced through ijtihad [interpretation] by our
leading scholars on the basis of our laws and prin¬
ciples. Our ancestors preceded the foreigners in tak¬
ing pride in their legislature and other matters in the
early years of Islam. An example is what happened
between ‘Umar [ibn al-Khattab, second caliph, 634—
644], may God be pleased with him, and Mu'awiyya
[a later caliph, 661-680]. When ‘Umar arrived in Syria
wearing his patched garment and riding his camel,
Mu'awiyya observed: “O, Commander of the Faith¬
ful, the people of Syria are accustomed to seeing their
rulers in splendid clothes. They do not fear anyone
who is simple in attire and appearance.” ‘Umar re¬
sponded, “We came to teach them how we rule, not
to learn from them how they rule.”
Similarly, [‘Umar’s] instructed his governors in
foreign provinces to observe Arab garb. He wrote a
letter to his governor in Persia, ‘Utba ibn Farqad, for¬
bidding [Muslims] to wear the dress of the Persians
and ordering them to preserve their Arab customs. Part
of what he said in the letter: “follow your grandfather
Ma‘add ibn ‘Adnan [patriarch of the northern Arab
tribes] in his toughness, perseverance, and harsh life
style.” The Arab descendants of Ma'add are like the
Spartans. [. ..] The Arabs were able to preserve their
national character in the provinces they conquered, so
long as they obeyed these instructions and maintained
their character, especially their language and religion.
[Other] nations assimilated into them and were
Arabized and Islamized. Those who abandoned these
features were assimilated into other peoples. The for¬
eigners imitated our ancestors in this respect, particu¬
larly the British. The heretical false renewers try to
convince us to abandon all that, even rules of inheri¬
tance, in which the British differ from the laws of all
other nations, allowing the eldest son to acquire the
entire inherited estate of his parents, while the rest of
his siblings receive nothing.
The Contempt of the Heretics and Copts for
the Muslims in Urging Them to Abandon
Their Religion
The contempt of the false renewers for us, the Mus¬
lims in this country, has reached such an extent that
heretics and Copts have spoken at podiums and
schools urging us to abandon our religion and our
entire shari‘a, not just the rules of inheritance. They
argue that the government has abandoned the rules
of the shari ‘a in such and such cases of the penal
code and finances, and that we remained silent and
accepted its judgment. Therefore, we must abandon
all the rest of God’s regulations regarding the per¬
sonal status code, inheritance, marriage, and di¬
vorce. There is no difference for these renewing
muftis [religious officials] between the two types of
regulations. [. ..]
Part 3
In clarifying the need for religious and earthly re¬
newal, and Islam’s perspective and encouragement,
I need to begin with a brief introduction on the stag¬
nation of the religious scholars and its negative im¬
pact on rulers and seekers of political and social re¬
form. [...] I include [...] statements by two Turks,
[the first] by one of the most enlightened scholars of
Islam and [the second] by an outspoken proponent
of heresy. I then mention a statement of the wise man
of the Orient [Afghani] about them.
[The first scholar] is the Shaykh al-Islam [chief
Ottoman religious official] Musa Kazim [Turkey,
1858-1920; see chapter 23], God bless his soul. In
RENEWAL, RENEWING, AND RENEWERS 83
his home in a suburb of Istanbul, he was explaining
to me his plan for the reform of the government of
Yemen. He formulated all its laws in accordance with
the shari'a. [He also planned] to establish a unified
commercial court to specialize in reviewing the cases
related to foreigners and Jews. I suggested to him,
“If you agree not to commit yourselves to Hanafi
doctrine, I guarantee you that I can deduce from the
vast Islamic shari ‘a all the rulings that the sultanate
needs and that address the conditions of the present
time, and so on.” He responded, “I realize that this
is possible, but what can we do with the official
scholars oi fatwas [religious rulings]?”
He means that the Islamic clerical scholars
charged with the issuance of official fatwas for the
state would oppose [such reforms]. Among the things
I learned about them, and about the Shaykh al-
Islam —who is restricted by them in the issuance of
fatwas —is that they do not issue fatwas in accor¬
dance with the rules of the [Ottoman] Mecelle-i
Ahkam-i ‘Adliye [Compendium of Legal Statutes,
1876], all of which conforms to shari‘a, because it
contains rules that contradict established statements
of Hanafi doctrine. [...]
[The second scholar] is Doctor ‘Abdullah Bey
Cevdet [Turkey, 1869-1932; see chapter 21], editor
of a magazine [Ictihad, or Rational Interpretation ]
that he used to publish in Egypt before the [re¬
promulgation of the Ottoman] Constitution [in 1908],
because he was persecuted and not allowed to enter
the Ottoman state. He is one of the founders of the
Committee of Union and Progress [CUP, which came
to power in the Ottoman Empire in 1908].
This man, who publicly declares heresy, helped
me in Istanbul with the project of al-Da ‘wa wa al-
irshad [Propagation and Guidance, an elite school
that Rida established in Egypt in 1912]. He informed
me that “if you succeed in this effort and establish
an Islamic college, I will volunteer to teach there and
deliver my health and science lessons in accordance
with your approach in religious reform.” I responded,
“How is that possible, while you oppose religion?”
He explained, “I oppose the religion of the shaykhs
of Fatih and Sulaymaniyya [historic mosques in
Istanbul], because it is impossible for us to progress
while we follow the ideas of those people. But the
understanding of Rashid [Rida] Efendi and Shaykh
Muhammad ‘Abduh of the religion of Islam helps
progress and benefits the state. I would be the first
to wish to serve Islam under your auspices.” [...]
The ‘ulama’ of Istanbul had a great influence on
the nation and the government. The ‘ulama’ of Egypt
do not enjoy the slightest share of such an influence—
how can they be accused of blocking civic progress,
and where is this progress? When did they put up such
a practical resistance that the government feared [to
make reforms]? When I presented the project of
al-Da‘wa wa al-irshad to [Ottoman] Prime Minister
Hiiseyin Hilmi Pasha [1855-1922], God bless his soul,
he told me: “This is a great project and necessary to
the state. Its implementation depends on the accep¬
tance of the ‘ulama’ and the approval of the Commit¬
tee of Union and Progress. I will speak to the Shaykh
al-Islam to convince the scholars, and to [Colonel
Mehmed] Sadik Bey [§ehrekii$tii, 1860-1940] to
convince the Central Committee of the CUP. I will
do my utmost to persuade them to use their influence
on this matter.” [General] Mahmud §evket Pasha
[Ottoman prime minister, 1858-1913], God bless his
soul, also told me of the influence of the Turkish re¬
ligious scholars, and then said: “The scholars in my
country (Iraq) do not have such an influence. What
is their status in Egypt?”
The Statement of Sayyid Jamal al-Din
[ al-Afgham ] on the Turkish Scholars
The statement of al-Sayyid Jamal al-Din [al-Afghani],
which I refer to here, and there are similar ones by
him regarding the Muslim ‘ulama’, concerns the fol¬
lowing incident:
During the time [Jamal al-Din] was at Istanbul,
the emperor of Japan [Mutsuhito Meiji, reigned
1867-1912] sent a letter to Sultan Abdulhamid [II,
reigned 1876-1909] seeking his friendship and say¬
ing that “each one of us is an Oriental king, and it
is in our interest and the interests of our people to
get acquainted, to establish friendly relations, and
to promote cooperation vis-a-vis the Western states
and peoples, who view us as one and the same. I see
the Western people send missionaries to our coun¬
try, evangelizing their religion because of the reli¬
gious freedom we have. I see that you do not do the
same. I would like you to send us preachers to evan¬
gelize for your religion (Islam), who can serve as
an implicit moral link between you and us.” The
sultan was interested in this letter and ordered the
formation of a committee of his advisors in Yildiz
Palace for consultation. It included the Shaykh al¬
lslam and the minister of education, the two minis-
84 Muhammad Rashid Rida
ters officially concerned with this issue, Sayyid
Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, most qualified in all re¬
spects, and others. They met with the sultan at
Ytldtz Palace and the discussion started. The
Shaykh al-Islam and the minister of education sug¬
gested the formation of a delegation of scholars
from the schools of Istanbul to be sent to Japan.
Sayyid Jamal al-Din remained silent. The sultan
directed his gaze at him and asked his opinion. He
said what may be summarized as follows: “Your
Majesty, these scholars turn even Muslims away
from Islam. How could they be charged with con¬
vincing the Japanese to adopt Islam? [My] opinion
is to develop a cadre of intelligent persons and pro¬
vide them with a special education that qualifies
them to fulfill this duty in the present age. It might
suffice for the time being, for His Majesty to send
a courteous letter to the emperor, along with an
appropriate gift, mention to him that his suggestion
has received the highest approval, and say that you
will look into its implementation in a satisfactory
manner.” The sultan adopted this view, but without
implementing the suggestion of special education
for Islamic evangelists.
A Conclusion on the Objective behind
the Two Renewals
I have mentioned the hadith on religious renewal:
“God sends to this nation at the beginning of every
century someone who renews its religion.” The
words of this text are [directly] related to our topic.
We have explained its meaning at the outset of the
lecture. The objective of this hadith focuses on the
return to the simplicity and guidance of religion as
it was in the beginning; to reunify the Muslims
around their commonality, prior to disunity and dis¬
cord; to justify individual ijtihad, except where [the
revealed text’s meaning is] self-evident; and to jus¬
tify those who engage in taqlid [imitation], follow¬
ing the doctrine or the scholar whose knowledge they
trust, without a divisive extremism that turns the
nation into factions and mutually hostile groups. [. ..]
Some of the means for this renewal include the re¬
vival of the Arabic language, in vocabulary, writing,
and speech; the writing of books in easy modern
styles; the spread of education and socialization,
according to scientific methods; and the spread of
Islamic teachings in the world.
If the nation needs renewal in maintaining its re¬
ligion, which God has perfected, prohibiting inno¬
vation, it is in even more need of renewal in earthly
affairs. Its interests differ in accordance to changes
in time, place, and the condition of the people. The
shari'a has taken all that into consideration, as stipu¬
lated in the books of fiqh [jurisprudence].
There are two kinds of this renewal in this regard.
One relates to the public interest and our need for
legislation. The Lawgiver [God] has recommended
this type of renewal in the statement of the Prophet,
may peace be upon him, “He who introduced some
good practice in Islam and was followed (by people),
he would be assured of reward like the one who fol¬
lowed it, without their rewards being diminished in
any respect. And he who introduced some evil prac¬
tice in Islam that was subsequently followed (by oth¬
ers), he would be required to bear the burden like that
of the one who followed this (evil practice), without
theirs being diminished in any respect.” Narrated by
Muslim [ibn al-Hajjaj, died 875] from the hadith of
Jarir ibn ‘Abdullah [companion of the Prophet, died
640]. Among these general practices are the founda¬
tion of the principles of useful sciences and arts and
the establishment of schools, orphanages, and hos¬
pitals. Everyone is equally [responsible] for this re¬
newal: individuals, groups, and governments. Some
are particular to government, such as military affairs,
on which depend the defense of the country and the
protection of the umma from aggression.
The legislation connected with this renewal is
entrusted in Islam to those in charge and to the group
known as ahl al-hal wa al-'aqd [the people who
loosen and bind]. They approve the legislation on the
basis of consultation and the exercise of reason, in
issues that are not stipulated as self-evident in God’s
revelation or the practice of the Prophet, according
to recognized criteria. The shari'a prohibits ijtihad
and all human legislation in the presence of a [self-
evident] text.
The second type [of renewal in earthly affairs]
relates to matters of livelihood, such as agriculture,
industry, trade, and the issue of harmless practices.
The shari‘a has left this to the experience of the
people. The Prophet, may peace be upon him. said
in this regard, “You are more knowledgeable about
your earthly affairs.” Narrated by Muslim from the
hadith of Anas [ibn Malik, servant of the Prophet,
circa 612-709] and ‘A’isha [bint Abi Bakr. wife of
RENEWAL, RENEWING, AND RENEWERS
85
the Prophet, circa 614-678], may God be pleased
with her. He commented on its meaning: “Whatever
concerns the affairs of your religion is referred to me,
and whatever relates to your earthly affairs, you are
more knowledgeable about.” Narrated by Ahmad
[ibn Hanbal, 780-855],
In conclusion, legitimate renewal includes all that
the umma and the state hold dear, such as the sciences,
arts, and industries; financial, administrative, and mili¬
tary systems; land, naval, and air installations. All
these are considered a collective duty in Islam, and the
entire umma sins when it neglects them. The shari ‘a
does not restrict the umma in pursuing them. The only
restrictions are to avoid inflicting or generating harm
and transgression (for example, exploiting the condi¬
tion of the financially needy by collecting usurious
interest from them), to observe the [jurisprudential]
principle according to which “Necessity permits the
impermissible,” to assess the extent of this necessity,
and to follow truth and justice.
7
Shaykh al-Amin bin ‘Ali al-Mazrui
Advice
Shaykh al-Amin bin Ali Mazrui (Kenya, 1890-1947) was the scion of a long line of religious
scholars from the large Mazrui clan, which had immigrated to Mombasa, Kenya, from Oman
during the 1700s. In the 1880s and 1890s, Arab colonial power in Kenya and Mombasa
was replaced by British rule. Al-Amin sought to explain what appeared to him to be a topsy¬
turvy world, and to find direction for a future he felt was being lost. He was very aware of
the nature of this debate as it was being discussed outside East Africa. He appears to have
read the teachings and writings of contemporary authors such as Muhammad Abduh (chap¬
ter 3) and Rashid Rida (chapter 6), What is especially interesting about al-Amin, however,
is the specific construction he gave to the singular historical character of Swahili Islamic
society, as well as the localized dilemmas in which it found itself during Mazrui’s lifetime, To
address these issues, Mazrui wrote two short-lived newspapers in Arabic and Swahili in the
early 1930s. Nothing has survived of those journals except for twenty-seven essays that he
later collected into a little booklet from which these excerpts are taken, 1
How Do We Imitate the Europeans?
All people of the world have their customs and hab¬
its which are not like those of other people. This is
because of dissimilarities people have in their cities,
nations, and religions. And the foundation by which
people know their way is their nationality, from
which they derive their habits and customs. For this
reason intelligent people in every tribe customarily
hold fast to these roots and habits and customs be¬
cause they fear becoming like the blackbird which
lost its way and [took to] imitating that of the spar¬
row, whose identity was lost to him yet who could
not become a sparrow, an existence which was nei¬
ther this nor that.
We must take care that we do not change our cus¬
toms to those of others who do not get along with us
except in an emergency, and then [if we do so, we
do so] only for the good, and [if we choose to change
to their ways, we should do so] only in ways that are
good and which do not violate our religion.
1 say this because every day we see ourselves
mimicking whites, and not only in ways that are good
and which do not contradict our religion.
We have imitated them in their habits; [it seems]
we have only seized upon [things like] drinking wine
and dressing as they do. 1 say [we should follow them
only] in their good customs, like their pastimes, their
ways of [conducting] meetings, their love of coun¬
try, their solidarity, and other things like these; [how¬
ever] in [other] things of ours, it does not benefit us
to mimic them.
We also have wanted to follow them in their ex¬
ertions. What we have observed of their exertions has
been in their entertainment like football, golf, music,
and dance, not in things like working or studying
artisanry as they do. These are not the sorts of things
we have taken to: to the contrary, we have left all
Shaykh al-Amin bin ‘Ali al-Mazrui, Uwongozi ( Advice )
(Mombasa, Kenya: East African Muslim Welfare Society,
1955), pp. 6-8, 45—48. First published in 1931-1932. Trans¬
lation from Swahili and introduction by Randall L. Pouwels.
Thanks to Professor Thomas Hinnebusch for his valuable help
with this translation.
1. Randall L. Pouwels, Horn and Crescent: Cultural
Change and Traditional Islam on the East African Coast,
800-1900 (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University
Press, 1987), pp. 97-124, 201-202; Shaykh Abdallah Salih
Farsy, The Shafi'i Ulama of East Africa, ca. 1830-1970
(Madison, Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press, 1989),
pp. 120-122; Ahmed I. Salim, “Sheikh al Amin bin Ali al
Mazrui: un rfformiste modeme au Kenya” (Shaykh al-Amin
bin ‘Ali al-Mazrui: A Modem Reformist in Kenya), pp. 59-
71 in Franfois Constantin, ed., Les votes de Vlslam en Afrique
orientate (The Paths of Islam in East Africa) (Paris: Editions
Karthala, 1987).
86
ADVICE 87
meaningful forms of employment to the Chaga, the
Taita, the Kikuyu, and the Kamba. 2 They are the ones
who do mechanical and railway work: they are the
telephone workers; they are the ones who do radio
and electrical work; they are the ones who make an
effort to learn the work of lighting and craftsmanship
and other modern forms of employment.
We have tried to follow the whites’ ideas about
knowledge, [the form of which] we have taken to be
[merely] a twisting of the tongue when we say “yes,” 3
even learning salutations like “good morning” or
“thank you,” which are how you greet or thank some¬
one in their language, as if the European language
itself is all the knowledge we need. It has gotten so
that people think there is no need for knowledge of
[practical affairs like] business, agriculture, work, or
other things!
Poor people of Mombasa! These days we cannot
[even] see the difference between [genuine] knowl¬
edge and [mere] language. These casual employees
of the Europeans who work as coolies and cooks and
“boys,” all [of them] speak the language of the whites
even more than our own. Are these ones [now] to be
taken to be scholars? No, rather as fools who belong
to the lowest order [of society].
We have tried to imitate the Europeans in how we
expect our women to act to the point that we expect
them to be like theirs. We don’t consider them to be
proper women if they don’t cut their hair [as white
women do] or wear frocks. Or the knowledge Euro¬
pean women have in fixing up their houses and mak¬
ing them comfortable and neat, and rearing their
children in a healthy way, and with good customs and
manners, and the ability they have in [doing] handy
work and crafts and cooking, we have never regarded
this twaddle as something that makes them civilized.
It is a stinking mess, and [something] to make our
women go around in circles.
2. [These ethnic groups were neighbors of the coastal
Swahili. When the British made Mombasa the principal port
city of their Kenyan colony, thousands of people from the up-
country crowded into the city seeking work and the excite¬
ment of the new possibilities that the new order seemed to
represent. They learned quickly about the new forms of em¬
ployment and mastered English, the new skills and ideas
needed to land jobs in light industry and transport. The
Swahili and other Muslims found themselves to be minori¬
ties in their own city.—Trans.]
3. [“ Fot-fot yes” in the original. I am unable to identify
this reference.—Trans.]
Praise the Lord! Is it only in bad things that we
see ways of following the whites’ example? It seems
we have become like flies, building only in sores, or
like scavenger beetles becoming offended only by a
good scent, and made happy by a stench, searching
for filth.
I implore you, O Prophet! Show us the truth, and
charge us with the vigor to follow it. Show us what
is worthless, and arm us with the strength to pre¬
vent it.
Advice for Today's Muslims
These quarrels in which Muslims are involved these
days reduce them to a contemptuous and humiliat¬
ing condition that accomplishes nothing for them
except to debase their religion, which requires [of
them] their best and [demands that they] cleanse
themselves of all that is base. Muslims these days are
in [such] a state of division that they are their [own
worst] enemies. One hardly sees a city anywhere
where there are not Muslims, and Muslims among
whom there are great differences.
For example, Mombasa has 75,000 people, and
among these are many Muslims who are the most
humiliated of all peoples. They are poor in learning,
poor in wealth, poor even in fearing the people who
lead them, poor in everything. One source of great
dissension in Mombasa concerns the Banyan com¬
munity—who number only a few people—and [yet]
they have two daily newspapers, while Mombasa
Muslims have none. And in the whole of Kenya there
exists not one, single [Muslim] newspaper except this
wretched little one of ours which is so little. It brings
me great sorrow that Goans have their own school,
while we have not one school in all our communi¬
ties [Swahili towns of East Africa] except these
Qur’an schools which a seven-year-old child enters
and—God forbid!—leaves at a barely mature age,
hardly knowing anything except how to read the
Qur’an. And [even this] he is hardly able to read
properly, nor know its meaning, even that of the
Fatiha [opening verses of the Qur’an], which he re¬
cites all the time in his daily and nighttime prayers.
So he finishes at the Qur’an school, and his father
takes him and he goes and pushes him into the fire
pit of the missionary school where there is great
misfortune [for him].
88 Shaykh al-Amin bin ‘Ali al-Mazrui
Our advice to today’s Muslims is to [encourage
them to] build their madrasas [seminaries] to teach
their children what is in the shari ‘a [religious law] and
what they need to know about life in this world as well.
This madrasa itself [provides] a stratagem for protect¬
ing children from the temptations of the mission
school, saves their religiosity, lifts them into the ex¬
alted ranks, and teaches them excellent manners and
great strength of character. This will [ward off] dis¬
grace and will encourage them to desire better things
of themselves, since all Muslims want very much to
be respected, as God Almighty showed in the Qur’ an. 4
This respect cannot be realized except, first, by open¬
ing the way needed to accomplish this, nor is there any
other means except through education that combines
[matters of] Religion and the World.
This is the true way of advancing Muslims to a
condition of pride and sublimation, the reason for
lifting them up. But where is the money to build these
madrasas ? I say the money is not lacking. Rather,
all the people require is a plan, [and] then they should
resolve to do this with their whole hearts; afterward
they ought to make a great effort, so then there will
be no problem that the money will be available.
The people of Mombasa number about 75,000, as
I have already stated, and many among them are Mus¬
lims. We believe that Muslims number about half, and
we, that is Arabs and Swahili, number around 12,000.
So if we require every person among us to donate three
shillings a year, we will collect 36,000 shillings in just
one year. This will be sufficient to build the madrasas
that we need and to teach our children everything they
need to know to benefit them in this world and in the
Hereafter.
People suffering misfortune will say that this [plan]
will cause them anxieties, but I say this must be and
that we can do what is necessary to improve our
resolve.
Every day we complain that our education is de¬
clining and that it is total nonsense to expect the
government to improve it. God forbid, we are stingy
with money! Do we think that great education will
happen without a little application and with a lot of
complaining?
We always want the government to treat us the
4. [The meaning is unclear: either that the Qur’an pro¬
vides evidence of the great things Mazrui desires for Mus¬
lims, or that the Qur’an provides the wisdom by which Mus¬
lims can achieve great things.—Trans.]
same as the Indians. [Yet] have we thought even for
a day of wanting to do as they do in giving as they
do to educate their children? Indians each donate
twenty shillings more than the Poll Tax they pay, and
they do not see like you that [there is anything wrong
in] teaching their children knowledge of the world.
So why cannot we hospitable [that is, otherwise gen¬
erous] people donate three shillings annually so our
children can learn about religion and worldly mat¬
ters too?
This is my plan and I place it before the eyes of
our community for consideration. I ask God Al¬
mighty to help us to fulfill it.
The Community of Islam
“Jama ‘a" in the Arabic language means something
which makes [many] people into one, [all] having a
part in a certain matter. Countrymen, for example,
are a family which encourages people who live in a
particular city to participate in the reconciliation of
their community, not in [creating] divisions between
tribe and tribe, nor between religion and religion.
And [it is the purpose of] the Muslim community to
encourage all Muslims to be one family, eliciting
harmony from their religion and avoiding harm. Thus
it enjoins every Muslim to be a brother to another,
not to [create] differences between Indian and
Swahili, nor between Arab and Kikuyu, nor between
European and Javanese, nor between the damned and
the devout, nor between master and servant.
God Almighty has arranged all Muslims in a form
of brotherhood by His word, which stated that “Mus¬
lims are brothers.” And the essence of this brother¬
hood is in the fundamental objective of achieving
unity, the abolition of different factions where every
one defends only its own interests and causes harm
to others. Confrontation saps people’s strength. Even
though their intention is to be united, they cling to
their differences, each favoring only themselves.
Look at the armies of Islam which set out to con¬
quer the cities of Iran in the time of our lord Abu
Bakr [first caliph, reigned 632-634]. They were in
four groups: ‘Amr ibn al-‘Asi [died 663] and his
army, Abu ‘Ubayda [ibn al-Jarra circa 581-639] and
his army, Yazid ibn Abi Sufyan [died 683] and his
army, and Shurahbil ibn Hasana [circa 570-639]
and his army. No doubt all of these shared one goal,
but their enmity was well known. Because of this
ADVICE 89
estrangement they were unable to defeat the Irani¬
ans until Khalid ibn Walid [died 642] went and
brought all four armies together, creating one army
under his command, which is when they defeated
the enemy.
Likewise, we have seen [how] the armies of the
Allies in the Great War [World War I] were afraid
of defeating their enemies so long as each country
had its armies under its own commanders. But when
they joined together under the command of General
[Ferdinand] Foche [of France], not many days passed
without victory. These [examples] show that tearing
at each other does not strengthen people even though
they intend to be harmonized.
A function of the Community of Islam is [to see]
that all Muslims are like the connecting parts of a
body, like the parts of our Lord, the whole thing:
and if one [part] is sick, the whole is seized by Wild
Cardamom Fever. 5 Furthermore, what is desirable
is that it be like this between Muslims, each part [of
5. [Matungu fever is a very painful sickness that is com¬
mon in East Africa.—Trans.]
the community] in respect to every other part. If the
Community of Islam becomes this way, it will dis¬
courage some from organizing their own [exclusive]
bonds, stopping them from bringing harm to oth¬
ers, and leaving [them] only [with] the duty a
brother in religion owes another. It will permit them
to help their brothers so they might bring about the
desired harmony. And when, for example, does a
rich person do harm when he tries to help his com¬
panion to be a rich man like him? Also, how bad
does it appear to be when a person stops himself
from rescuing a neighbor from a fearful danger in
order that they might be like each other in vigor?
Do we think we should distance ourselves from the
bigotry of people when they were in the kind of
ignorance [that existed] before the Prophet came,
and follow what the Prophet told us? Should we not
hold fast to our Islamic comradeship, thus saving
each other? A Muslim is the brother of a fellow
Muslim, just as the Prophet said.
8
Abdullah Abdurahman
Democratic Institutions in South Africa
Abdullah Abdurahman (South Africa, 1870-1940) was the pre-eminent political leader of
South Asians in South Africa in the first half of the twentieth century. Abdurahman's pater¬
nal grandfather was a former slave who founded a successful business in Cape Town; his
father studied theology at al-Azhar in Cairo; Aburahman, by contrast, went to Scotland to
study medicine, and established a medical practice on his return to Cape Town in 1895.
Abdurahman soon entered politics, helping to found the African People's Organisation and
serving as its president from 1905 until his death in 1940. Despite the imposition of suf¬
frage restrictions on nonwhites, Abdurahman was elected to the Cape Town City Council
and the Cape Provincial Council, running on a platform of unity among nonwhite peoples
and a demand for equal civil and political rights with whites. Abdurahman's speeches rarely
referred to Islam, perhaps because many of the South Asians and Africans whom he rep¬
resented were not Muslim. However, in front of a Muslim audience—as in the speech
described here, given to the Young Muslim Debating Society in Durban—he allowed him¬
self passing references that linked his faith with his political beliefs. By the time of this speech,
in the mid-1930s, Abdurahman's reformism was already losing favor with younger militants,
who espoused communism and secular nationalism. 1
Dr. A. Abdurahman, M[ember of] Provincial]
Qpuncil], who arrived in Durban last week as a
member of the Coloured Fact Finding Commission,
was accorded a public welcome last Sunday morn¬
ing at the Muslim Institute, Queen Street, under the
auspices of the Young Muslim Debating Society. In
introducing the speaker, the chairman, Mr. E. H.
Ismail, said that the doctor needed no introduction
and described him as the father of non-Europeans.
Most of them were aware, said the chairman, that the
doctor was a member of the Provincial Council and
also occupied an important position on the Capetown
City Council. He acted as leader to the South Afri¬
can Indian deputation that went to India in 1929. As
a leader of the non-Europeans in South Africa he was
second to none.
Dr. Abdurahman, who chose as his subject “Demo¬
cratic Institutions in South Africa,” said that it was a
most interesting as well as a most difficult subject.
“Democracy,” said the learned speaker, “is an ideal
which arises from ideas and wishes of the people.”
As to what was meant by democracy, no two people
would give the same answer. Democracy can be de¬
scribed as something in one’s mind. The highest aim
of any human being was to be happy. There were
different conceptions of happiness. For instance, the
drunkard regarded it as the height of happiness to get
drunk, the religious man spent his time in prayers so
that his soul may be saved and he found happiness
there, then there was the individual that found hap¬
piness in pursuing his vocation.
The Aim of Democracy
It was the aim of democracy that every man in this
world should have equal right to pursue happiness, and
provided a man did not seek happiness in such a man-
“Dr. Abdurahman on Democracy,” Indian Views , Durban,
South Africa, July 19, 1935, p. 4. Introduction by Charles
Kurzman.
1. Mogamed Tasleem Ajam, “Dr Abdullah Abdurahman,”
Kronos: Journal of Cape History, volume 17, 1990, pp. 48-
58; Ian Golden, Making Race: The Politics and Economics of
Coloured Identity in South Africa (Cape Town, South Africa:
Maskew Miller Longman, 1987), pp. 33—40; Gavin Lewis, Be¬
tween the Wire and the Wall: A History of South African
'Coloured' Politics (New York: St. Martin’s Press. 1987),
pp. 198-204; R. E. Van der Ross, The Rise and Decline of
Apartheid: A Study of Political Movements among the
Coloured People of South Africa, 1880-1985 (Cape Town,
South Africa: Tafelberg, 1986).
90
DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS IN SOUTH AFRICA 9 I
ner as to disturb or injure others, no obstacles should
be placed in his way. If a lover of music enjoyed him¬
self by playing music in his own home, there should
be nothing preventing him from doing so, but if he
went out in the street disturbing others with his music,
he should be prevented. The greatest gift that God had
given to man was skill. It required skill to follow a
trade or profession and it was the greatest sin in the
world to prevent a man from exercising his skill by
following his trade or vocation.
The Vote and the Franchise
“Democracy had nothing to do with the vote or the
franchise,” said the doctor. This was something that
you can use to put your ideas into practice. The vote
was merely an instrument to put your ideals into
operation. A man, however, cannot follow all the
ideas that pass through his mind. If he did so he
would find himself in a lunatic asylum. Democracy
meant that we were all equal, and this leads us to
our religion, Islam, which also teaches us that we
are all equal. God has given us the power of rea¬
soning, which must be developed to its fullest ex¬
tent. The Prophet of Islam had said that reasoning
lighted the torch to heaven. If God made no distinc¬
tion between man and man, we had no right to do
so. And until we are regarded as equal in this coun¬
try, there is no such thing as a democratic institu¬
tion. If we study the history of the world, we find
that there were no democratic institutions until a few
hundred years ago. In a democratic institution a man
is free, equal before God and man, and no restric¬
tions are placed on him. It was stated in the Ameri¬
can declaration of rights that every man was bom
free. If you admit this doctrine of everyone being
equal, you cannot treat a class of people differen¬
tially. Though God had made us all equal, it was
also true that he had made us different. There were
different races and different colours, but this did not
imply that we were not equal. There must be a pur¬
pose of God in creating the difference.
Custom and Tradition
While it is true that man is bom free in this world, it
is also true that there was such a thing as custom and
tradition. From its birth, a child’s character is molded
by its parents, and custom and tradition mold his
ideas for him. The tradition we have in South Africa
is that the white man inherits certain rights immedi¬
ately [as] he comes into this world. Not because he
has any more intelligence than any one of us, but
because of his birth. Immediately [as] you begin to
treat a man in a privileged manner irrespective of his
intelligence or character, you are departing from the
ideals of democracy, and that is what we have here
in South Africa. Man, here, is judged by something
for which he is not responsible. Because he belongs
to a different race, and is of a different colour, he is
differentiated against.
The Two Groups
We can divide the population of South Africa into
two groups. The privileged classes or the Europeans,
who are in a minority, and the vast majority of un¬
privileged classes known as the non-Europeans.
While the former inherit all the privileges of free
citizenship, the latter inherit the restrictions and pov¬
erty of their parents. We must not expect the Euro¬
pean in this country to be a democrat, because he
comes out of a mold where the character is molded
for him. It is impressed upon the white child to re¬
gard himself superior than those of a different colour.
It will be years before the democratic ideals are im¬
pressed upon the Europeans of South Africa, and as
long as we have different groups we shall have no
democratic institutions.
Our Present System
The system of government in South Africa today
can be compared with the system which prevailed
400 years b.c. They had then a democratic institu¬
tion, but only for the privileged classes. There are
already a number of Europeans who have realized
that the system is wrong and unjust. We have the
white labour or the civilized labour policy, which
reserves skilled labour for the privileged classes. If
there was a democratic institution in South Africa,
this would not be the case. The privileged classes
cannot continue to oppress the different classes for¬
ever. The Native is now aspiring for something
higher, and the pressure of the privileged classes is
becoming greater. As the oppressed classes consoli-
92 Abdullah Abdurahman
date themselves and show a united front, they will
compel the Europeans to accede to at least some of
their demands. We have seen that the group system
leads to destruction. By consolidating the Native,
the Coloured, and the Indian, we can gain much.
The fear of physical force is driving the Boer and
the Briton into one people. Why should we not con¬
solidate our forces? We cannot achieve our ideal of
democratic institution in a day or a week. We may
not see it in our time, but come it must, concluded
the doctor.
At the conclusion of the speech questions were
invited and satisfactorily answered by the speaker.
Mr. A[bdulla] I[smail] Kajee [1896-1947] thanked
the doctor for the very interesting lecture and said that
he agreed that there should be cooperation between
the different groups. Mr. M. S. Badat proposed a vote
of thanks, which was carried.
9
‘Abd al-Hamid Ibn Badis
The Principles of Governing in Islam
From the Speech of [Abu Bakr] al-Siddiq
‘Abd al-Hamid Ibn Badis (Algeria, 1889-1940) was an Islamic reformer, nationalist leader,
and founder of the Association of Algerian Scholars. Ibn Badis was born in Constantine,
Algeria, to a prominent Berber family and received religious education. In 1908, he
joined the Zaytuna mosque in Tunis, where he was exposed to the reformist ideas of
Sayyid Jamal al-Din Afghani (chapter I I) and Muhammad ‘Abduh (chapter 3). After
graduation, Ibn Badis returned to Algeria in 1913 to devote his career to Islamic re¬
form, education, and nationalism. In response to the alienating policies of the French
and the Francophile tendencies of the Algerian “evolues” (assimilationists), Ibn Badis
formulated a program that asserted the Arab and Islamic identity of Algerians, stressed
Arabic and Islamic education, and prepared Algerians for independence from the French,
In addition, he proposed a modernist interpretation of the Qur'an that attributed the
decline of Islamic society to mystical practices, intellectual stagnation, disunity, and
political despotism. Ibn Badis articulated his views in several books and in his news¬
papers al-Muntaqid (The Critic) and al-Shihab (The Meteor), In 1931, he established the
Association of Algerian Scholars to promote Algerian identity and Islamic reform and
to combat the Sufi orders and the assimilationists. The Association opened hundreds
of free Arabic and Qur'anic schools, advocated cultural and social reform, and com¬
bated practices that it viewed as corrupt. The article presented here reflects Ibn Badis’s
nonconventional response to the abolition of the Ottoman caliphate, which he held
responsible for the repression and injustice of Muslim societies.
When Abu Bakr al-Siddiq (may God be pleased with
him) was sworn in as caliph [in the year 632], he as¬
cended the pulpit and addressed the people with a
speech that included the principles of governance.
These principles have only recently been achieved
by some nations, albeit with inconsistency.
This is the text of Abu Bakr’s speech:
O People. I was entrusted as your ruler, although I
am not better than any one of you.
‘Abd al-Hamid Ibn Badis, “Usui al-wilayat fi al-islam, min
khutba al-Siddiq (Allah ta‘ali ‘anhu)” (The Principles of Gov¬
erning in Islam, From the Speech of [Abu Bakr] the Upright,
May God Be Pleased with Him), al-Shihab (The Meteor ),
Constantine, Algeria, volume 13, number 11, January 1938,
pp. 468—471. Translation from Arabic and introduction by
Emad Eldin Shahin.
1. Salah al-Din al-Jurshi, Tajribafi al-islah: Ibn Badis
(A Case in Reform: Ibn Badis ) (Tunis, Tunisia: Dar al-Raya
li al-Nashr, 1978); Turki Rabih, al-Shaykh ‘Abd al-Hamid
Support me as long as you see me following the
right path, and correct me when you see me going
astray.
Obey me as long as I observe God in your affairs.
If I disobey Him, you owe me no obedience.
The weak among you are powerful [in my eyes]
until I get them their due. The powerful among you
are weak [in my eyes] until I take away from them
what is due to others.
Ibn Badis: Ra’id al-islah wa al-tarbiyah fi al-jaza’ir
(Shaykh ‘Abd al-Hamid Ibn Badis: Pioneer of Reform and
Education in Algeria) (Algiers, Algeria: al-Sharika al-
Wataniyya li al-Nashr wa al-Tawzi‘, 1969); Emad Eldin
Shahin, "Abd al-Hamid Ibn Badis." in John L. Esposito, ed.,
Oxford Encyclopedia of the Modern Islamic World (New
York: Oxford University Press, 1995), volume 2, pp. 161-
162; Fathi ‘Uthman. 'Abd al-Hamid Ibn Badis: Ra’id al-
haraka al-islamiyya fi al-jaza'ir al-mu‘asira (Ibn Badis:
Pioneer of the Islamic Movement in Contemporary Algeria)
(Kuwait City, Kuwait: Dar al-Qalam, 1987).
93
94 ‘Abd al-Hamid Ibn Badis
I say that and seek God’s forgiveness for myself
and for you.
The First Principle
No one has the right to assume any of the affairs of
the umma [Muslim community] without their con¬
sent. It is the people that have the right to delegate
authority to the leaders and depose them. No one
can rule without the consent of the people. Rule
cannot be bequeathed nor be based on personal con¬
siderations. This principle is derived from [Abu
Bakr’s] statement, “I was entrusted as your ruler.”
In other words, I was entrusted by others; and that
is “you.”
The Second Principle
He who manages an affair of the Muslim community
should be the most qualified in this matter and not the
best in behavior. If two persons share good behavior
and qualifications, but one is better in good behavior
and the other is more qualified for this matter, the one
who is better qualified should be entrusted with this
matter. Undoubtedly, qualification varies with the cir¬
cumstance and the position. Someone might be quali¬
fied in a specific matter and position for possessing
the characteristics suitable for that position. In this
case, he should be entrusted with that post. On this
basis, the Prophet appointed ‘Amr ibn al-‘Asi [died
663] to lead the army of Dhat al-Salasil and supported
him with Abu Bakr, ‘Umar [ibn al-Khattab, died 644],
and Abu ‘Ubayda ibn al-Jarra [circa 581-639], who
were all under his command, though they were better
than him. He also appointed Usama ibn Zayd [died
circa 673] as a commander of an army that included
Abu Bakr and ‘Umar. This principle is based on the
statement, “although I am not better than any one of
you.”
The Third Principle
Assuming the affairs of the people does not make the
ruler better than anyone else. Preference is achieved
through merit and deeds. If Abu Bakr was better, this
was not due to his mle over them but because of his
deeds and stances. This principle is also derived from
the statement, “although I am not better than any one
of you.”
The Fourth Principle
The people have the right to monitor those in charge
because they are the source of their authority and
preserve the right to appoint or depose them.
The Fifth Principle
The responsibility of the people toward the mler lies
in offering assistance to him as long as they see him
following the righteous path. They must support him,
as they share with him the responsibility. This prin¬
ciple, as the previous one, is derived from the state¬
ment, “Support me as long as you see me following
the right path.”
The Sixth Principle
The responsibility of the people also lies in advising
and guiding the mler and pointing the righteous path
to him when he deviates. The people must correct him
if he misbehaves. This principle is based on the state¬
ment, “correct me when you see me going astray.”
The Seventh Principle
The people have the right to question the mlers, hold
them accountable for their actions, and make them
follow the choice of the nation, not their own. The
people have the final word, not the mlers. This is a
result of the people’s right to hold the mlers account¬
able and correct them when they are convinced that
the mlers are not following the right path, and can¬
not convince the people otherwise. This is derived
form the statement, “correct me when you see me
going astray.”
The Eighth Principle
Any one who assumes an affair of the people should
declare the plan he is going to follow, so that the
people become aware of and agree to it. He is not
allowed to lead the people as he pleases, but as they
THE PRINCIPLES OF GOVERNING IN ISLAM 95
please. This principle is based on the statement,
“Obey me as long as I observe God in your affairs.”
His plan is the obedience of God. The people knew
what the obedience of God in Islam entailed.
The Ninth Principle
The people will not be governed except by the law they
voluntarily adopt, the law that realizes their interest. The
rulers only implement the will of the people, who obey
the law because it emanates from them, not because it
is imposed on them by any other authority, be it of an
individual or of a group. This makes the people feel free
to manage their affairs on their own. Everyone in soci¬
ety will share this feeling. Freedom and sovereignty are
a natural and legitimate right of every individual in
society. This principle is derived from the statement,
“Obey me as long as I observe God in your affairs. If I
disobey Him, you owe me no obedience.” Thus, they
do not obey the ruler per se, but they obey God by fol¬
lowing the law that He has revealed and that they have
accepted for themselves. The ruler is delegated by them
to apply this law to everyone, including himself. There¬
fore, if he deviates, he forsakes their obedience.
The Tenth Principle
All are equal before the law, regardless of their
strength or weakness. The law should apply to the
strong without any fear of their strength and to the
weak without leniency for their weakness.
The Eleventh Principle
[The state] should protect the rights of the individu¬
als and groups in society. The rights of the weak
should not be forsaken because of their weakness,
and the strong should not usurp the right of anyone
because of their strength.
The Twelfth Principle
[The state] should maintain a balance in society
when protecting the rights of its members. The dues
should be fairly taken from the strong without trans¬
gression or weakening them. The rights of the weak
should be granted to them without favor due to their
weakness, so that they do not transgress against
others. This principle and the two previous ones are
derived from the statement, “The weak among
you are powerful [in my eyes] until I get them their
due. The powerful among you are weak [in my
eyes] until I take away from them what is due to
others.”
The Thirteenth Principle
There should be a realization of a mutual responsi¬
bility of the ruler and the ruled in reforming society.
They should always feel the need to continue work¬
ing strenuously and seriously, and seek forgiveness
from God, who oversees them. This is based on the
statement, “I say that and seek God’s forgiveness for
myself and for you.”
This is what the first caliph in Islam stated and
implemented fourteen centuries ago. Are the civi¬
lized nations close to this today? Was Abu Bakr
making these statements on his own? No, he was
inspired by Islam. He addressed the Muslims at that
time with what they already knew; had he done
otherwise, they would not have accepted his speech.
Were these principles known to or practiced by other
nations then? No, nations were immersed in the
darkness of ignorance and deterioration, suffering
the chains of humiliation and enslavement under
monarchical and clerical rule. These principles were
not devised by men but were revealed by God, the
All-Knowing and Wise. We pray to God to rescue
us and all of humanity and grant us success in re¬
turning to these principles, without which there can
be no salvation.
10
Muhammad Ahmad Mahjub
The Intellectual Movement in the Sudan:
Which Direction Should It Take?
Muhammad Ahmad Mahjub (Sudan, 1908-1976) was a lawyer, judge, poet, anticolonial
activist, and politician. Trained in colonial schools, he participated as a young man in the
Sudanese intellectual reform movement that came to be known by the name of its jour¬
nal, al-Fajr (The Dawn), founded in 1934. Mahjub and others in this movement sought to
build a modern Sudanese identity by downplaying the sectarian and regional distinctions
that divided the colony, This identity, as Mahjub argued in the essay translated here, was
affiliated closely with the Arab Islamic world, notwithstanding the large number of non-
Muslim non-Arabs in the south of the colony. In the 1940s and 1950s, Mahjub pushed to
radicalize the Sudanese nationalist movement and helped write the Sudan's constitution
and declaration of independence. Over the following two decades, he was by turns a
top government official and a political prisoner, as democratic governments were suc¬
ceeded by military ones. His final imprisonment and exile followed two terms as prime
minister. Known as “the Boss,” Mahjub left a political legacy that included repression of
leftists and southerners, in addition to fervent defense of democracy. 1
In all places and times, from the beginning of creation
to this day and on to eternity, distinguished individu¬
als and those with true culture have thought and will
always think about realizing the ideal. Human effort
is harnessed to achieve it, and lifestyle is improved to
attain it. This ideal gives people a greater purpose for
existence. Every aspect of life and each cultural ide¬
ology has its own sincere, dedicated advocates who
do everything within their power to achieve outcomes
that their followers among the masses perceive as dif¬
ficult, if not impossible, to attain. If it were not for these
sincere idealists, literature and the arts would never
advance, because the nature of human beings is to fear
dangers and to avoid them, to prefer the conventions
of their parents, and to resist all change in ideas and
action. Perhaps the universe would inevitably stagnate,
Muhammad Ahmad Mahjub, “al-Haraka al-fikriyya fi al-
Sudan: ‘Ila ‘ayna yajib ‘an tatajih” (The Intellectual Move¬
ment in the Sudan: Which Direction Should It Take?), in
Nahwa al-ghad (Toward Tomorrow ) (Khartoum, Sudan:
Jami'at al-Khurtum, Qism al-Ta’Iif wa al-Nashr, 1970),
pp. 209-211, 215-217, 226-227, 233-234. First published
in 1941. Translation from Arabic by Hager El Hadidi. Intro¬
duction by Charles Kurzman.
1. Muddathir Abdel-Rahim, Imperialism and Nationalism
in the Sudan: A Study in Constitutional and Political
were it not for the appearance of a handful of talented,
sincere, and dedicated idealists who blow the trum¬
pet and encourage people toward a goal that has to be
achieved by talented people like themselves. They
insist that the goal they envision is necessary for them¬
selves and others. They have the patience, the resil¬
ience, and the power of faith that makes them trust in
ultimate victory.
The ideal life is important for humans, both as
individuals and as part of a group with whom they
have relationships based on nationality, blood, reli¬
gion, common goals, public celebrations, and shared
travails. Individuals and groups should recognize and
attend to the ideal life, in all its branches and subdi¬
visions: material life and intellectual life each have
their place. In recent times, humans’ goals have be¬
come deeply interconnected, making the prosperity
Development, 1899-1956 (Oxford, England: Clarendon Press,
1969), pp. 109-117; Afaf Abdel Majid Abu Hasabu. Factional
Conflict in the Sudanese Nationalist Movement, 1918-1948
(Khartoum, Sudan: University of Khartoum, 1985); Carolyn
Fluehr-Lobban, Richard A. Lobban, Jr., and John Obert Voll,
Historical Dictionary of the Sudan, 2d ed. (Metuchen, N.J.:
Scarecrow Press, 1992). p. 133: Abdel Salam Sidahmed, Poli¬
tics and Islam in Contemporary Sudan (New York: St. Martin's
Press, 1996), pp. 35^41.
96
THE INTELLECTUAL MOVEMENT IN THE SUDAN 97
of an individual not only in contradiction with that
of others but also with the prosperity and security of
the group. A piece of candy in the hands of an oblivi¬
ous child means the deprivation of his sad friend. A
beautifully designed house, with cozy and luxurious
furniture, is inhabited by an obtuse and insipid char¬
acter, lacking in generosity; whereas the poet, the
singing bird, the lyre player who nearly discovers the
secrets of the universe, cannot find a lowly shack, let
alone a luxurious abode.
This abominable contradiction is even more ap¬
parent in the relationship among nations than among
individuals. However, in the world of culture and the
universe of intellect, in mental activities that elevate
humanity through novel findings and innovative
opinions, this cutthroat competition does not and
cannot exist. This is good news for human beings.
They can find happiness in the world of culture and
intellect, where they enjoy creating ideal visions and
rising to achieve them. Generation follows genera¬
tion, but the ideal is continuously rejuvenated, as are
activities to achieve it.
It is easy to imagine a situation in which every
race, nation, family, and individual has an equal share
of culture, justice, comfort, and status. But this situa¬
tion cannot be achieved unless the individuals, na¬
tions, and races whom God has granted the privilege
of intellect and morality, and are thus able to shape
the future, take it as their life mission to shower their
culture, science, and wealth upon their neighbors, the
seekers and the weak, with the intention of celebrat¬
ing the highest ethical, intellectual, and material ide¬
als of humanity.
But the teachings and generosity of a select elite
are fruitless unless all people have reached a high
degree of nobility. For some people do not benefit
from education, and all effort to reform them is
wasted—either because of the ignorance and stupid¬
ity bequeathed from past generations, or because of
the evil that has overtaken them. How is it possible to
rectify what time has spoiled? There is also a class of
regressive and rigid people who do not accept inno¬
vative opinions even if they are right, who don’t join
a caravan unless they can maintain the idea that they
are crossing the desert of life unaccompanied. There
are also those self-interested individuals who have
been blinded by their desire to preserve the status quo,
in order to retain power, however illegitimate, and to
hang on to the wealth derived from this power, how¬
ever unethical. Reformists must do away with such
people in every time and place, and in every branch
of material and intellectual life. Their self-interested
recalcitrance must be confronted. Recalcitrance will
evaporate when faced with loyal, selfless visionaries
struggling for perfection. This struggle and ultimate
victory in the battle between light and darkness, truth
and falseness, progress and annihilation, depend on the
zeal and integrity of the leaders of the renaissance, and
on their innovativeness against the obstinacy of the
propagators of rigidity and dissent.
An ideal does not know mediocrity; it requires
perfection. And this is not imaginary, not a mirage.
This is a conflict between people who care only about
food, drink, clothing, and personal pleasures, and
people who see that life is worthless when its short
period is spent seeking common ordinary pleasures.
Such [hedonism] is bom out of ignorance, idiocy, and
a stupidity that cannot imagine life as a continuous
chain where the living depart, their vanishing bod¬
ies die, and their riches remain for future generations.
That is why the propagators of reform and the wor¬
shipers of the ideal formulate plans that cannot be
accomplished in their lifetime but must be pursued
as long as life continues. They spread science and
enlightenment without discriminating between
classes, nations, and races. The progress of science
and enlightenment weakens fanatic loyalties and
competition between individuals and groups, erases
differences and misunderstandings, and enables the
exchange of trust and respect.
Such are the loyal reformists, the selfless propa¬
gators of the ideal, in every place and time. And we
are not to be blamed for wanting to join them for a
moment to formulate an ideal for the intellectual
movement that we desire for this growing country. I
don’t pretend to be one of those talented people to
whom the secrets of the era are revealed, who peek
into the past of nations and understand the fate of
their intellectual movements, who then look far into
the future and reveal what it portends, the opinions
and actions that it requires, and who lay out the tru¬
est ideals for the intellectual movement in their coun¬
try. That is an honor I cannot claim. But I am going
to attempt to study the past and present of this na¬
tion, and to study the past and present of the nations
I have known. Following that, I will try to direct the
intellectual movement in our nation toward what I
see as the ideal. If I am successful, I will be satisfied.
If I fail, let my solace be that this nation will never
lack offspring to rectify my mistakes and reform my
98 Muhammad Ahmad Mahjub
errors, to present us with the ideal that we will all
work together to achieve. [. ..]
The history of Islam in this country [the Sudan] dates
back to the year 22 a.h., or 642 a.d., when ‘Abdullah
[ibn Sa‘d] ibn Abi Sarh [died 656] was appointed to
invade Nubia at the head of 20,000 warriors. Since
that era, Islam spread, with the da ‘wa [propagation]
strengthening in this country until the Arab conquest
of lower Nubia in 1318 a.d. and of upper Nubia in
the year 1505 a.d. Thus Islam prevailed and became
the religion of the majority of the population of this
country.
The influence of Islam in this country is clear and
tangible; you can see it in your [daily] comings and
goings, and you can feel it in every action of the people
of this country. Until recently, no movement could
be successful in transforming or changing conditions
unless it was a religious movement, or at least wear¬
ing the garb of religion. The story of the Mahdiyya is
arecent example. The da ‘wa of al-Mahdi [Muhammad
Ahmad, anticolonial leader, 1844-1885] was a reli¬
gious da'wa, accepted by the people in the name of
religion. As a result, they revolted against the corrupt¬
ers [the colonial regime], expelled them from their
country, and took over governance. If it had not been
for religion, you would not have seen people dying for
the sake of God and acting so bravely, seeking nei¬
ther fortune nor prestige nor worldly position. The liv¬
ing envy the dead, who have won the honor of mar¬
tyrdom. A nation with such religious fervor can¬
not tolerate opinions that have atheistic tendencies or
break the norms of conventional morality. It accepts
nothing from its intellectuals but honest words and
sincere actions, virtue of the tongue and the hand, and
honorable intentions.
In every place where Islam has spread, Arab litera¬
ture and culture has [also] spread. The Scripture of
God, the sunna [sacred precedent] of His Messenger,
and the noble hadith [sayings of the Prophet] are not
only in the Arabic language, but are also the purest
sources of this language. It is necessary to learn, under¬
stand, and appreciate them in their original language.
Muslims are very keen to come to understand and
appreciate this legacy, and to become closer to the
spirit of religion by studying its roots and following
its precepts. That is why the Sudan was fortunate that
the Arabic language spread in its lands, both because
of the spread of Islam among its people, and because
Arab blood has become the majority among its popu¬
lation. The Sudan has remained, until the last conquest
in 1898, far from the influence of European languages;
there were no non-Arab languages heard in it except
the Turkish language, and this was after the conquest
of Muhammad ‘Ali [Ottoman ruler of Egypt, 1805—
1849] in the year 1820. And even then, the Turkish
language was not the official state language, and was
not taught in schools, but was only spoken by the
Turkish rulers among themselves.
It is no wonder that the language of the people of
the Sudan, especially in the desert, is the closest to
classical Arabic. And it is no wonder that we find the
people of the Sudan inclining toward [the classical
genres of] hamasa [heroic] and fakhr [vainglorious]
verse, whether in their songs or their poetry. They
have great passion for all kinds of horsemanship.
They are noted for their generosity and openhand-
edness, extending protection to their guests and tak¬
ing care of their neighbors. They find meanness con¬
temptible. They do not accept humiliation, and they
are not happy with defeat. Any man among them,
regardless of how poor he is, would not stain him¬
self with the humiliation of begging, and would not
stoop to relinquish public duty.
And the impact of Islamic religion and Arab cul¬
ture in this country is most apparent in the legacy of
the past generation—literary figures such as Shaykh
Husayn al-Zahra’ [died 1895], Shaykh al-Darir,
Shaykh Abu’l-Qasim Ahmad Hashim [died 1934],
and Shaykh [Muhammad ‘Umar] al-Banna' the elder
[circa 1847-1919]. Most of their poems were [in the
genres] of al-mada ’ih al-nabawaiyya [praise of the
Prophet], zikr shama’il al-rasul [remembrance of
the qualities of the Messenger], and the history of
the Prophet’s conquests and victories. Their verse
also included some poetry [in the genres] of fakhr ,
hamasa, and al-hath ‘ala al-jihad [inspiring sacred
struggle]. Each one of these poems begins with a
delicate ghazal [love poetry] in the manner of the
ancient Arabs. This is not all the previous generation
has given us; they also left a genre of literature that,
despite its originality, has been ignored by the intel¬
lectuals among us. In fact, this literature is wonder¬
ful, and unique within its genre. I refer to the stories
of the mulid [birth] of the noble Prophet which are
read in zikr circles. If you had the good fortune to
read the mulid by the leaders of the Tijaniyya [Sufi
order] entitled "Insan al-kamal” (The Perfect Hu¬
man), or to hear its narration, you would doubtless
find it a wonderful literature, beautiful and harmo-
- HE INTELLECTUAL MOVEMENT IN THE SUDAN 99
nious narratives with fine examples of rhetoric and
metaphor. The late Shaykh Muhammad Hashim
wrote an introduction to the mulid that is a master¬
piece of rhetoric in its expressions, structure, and
meaning. All of these are examples of the influence
of Islamic religion and Arab literature on our life.
This influence is strong and ongoing; it still affects
people’s minds, readers and writers alike.
Such influence has also increased through contact
with Egypt since the last invasion, because Egypt
itself is under the sway of Islamic religion and Arab
culture, despite its periodic tendencies to return to the
pharaohs or to cling to the fringes of the West.
It is necessary for us to attend to this influence
when we are attempting to direct the intellectual
movement in this county. This influence warrants at
least a brief discussion. And I state with increasing
certainty that the impact of Islamic religion and Arab
culture will remain part of our intellectual movement
as long as this country exists, and as long as it has
culture and intellectual movement. However, this
impact will undoubtedly be subject to interaction
with the modem opinions and Western ideas that we
are acquiring. Both will be subject to the climate of
this country and to ideas and imagination inspired by
its geography and its nature. That is why we need to
speak first about the effect of Western culture in our
country, and second about the country’s climate,
geography, and nature, and the effect of all of these
on the intellectual movement. We are attempting to
draft the ideal of the intellectual movement, and to
direct the movement toward the goal desired by its
loyal, selfless, devoted offspring. [. ..]
Such has been the intellectual movement in our coun¬
try up to now. And this is its future, as it appears to
us through this exploration of the past and present
of this country, the conditions required to achieve this
desired intellectual movement, and the implications
of its ideal.
So what is the ideal that this intellectual move¬
ment must follow? And how can it be reached? The
ideal intellectual movement in this country will re¬
spect the religious practices of Islam, the true reli¬
gion, and will work under its right guidance. It will
be Arab in language and taste, inspired by the past
and present of this country, making use of its nature
and the customs, traditions, and dispositions of its
people, elevated by all of these toward the goal of
establishing a proper national literature. This liter¬
ary movement will eventually be transformed into a
political movement that leads to the independence of
the country—political, social, and intellectual.
This ideal is the goal of the intellectual movement
in this country. On the surface, it may seem remote,
prohibitive, and hard to achieve; it calls for the ef¬
fort of giants and the work of generations. But an
ideal does not know mediocrity; it requires perfec¬
tion. Let us make our ideal clear and draw the path
to reach it. This country shall not lack dutiful, loyal,
educated, and visionary offspring to take up the bur¬
den of its renaissance.
To complete our intellectual movement, we must
grasp the Arab Islamic heritage. This effort awaiting
us is unlike that of Shaykh Nasif al-Yaziji ([Lebanese
Christian poet and philologist,] 1800-1871) and his
companions, because the writings of the Arab Islamic
heritage have already been published in Egypt and
Syria. All that we need to do is devote ourselves to
the study of this Arab Islamic heritage—a detailed
study based on scrutiny, criticism, and interconnected
comparisons so that we get the full benefit of this
heritage.
Maybe someone will ask me: And what is the way
to learn this Arab Islamic heritage and become inspired
by it? So I will say that learning involves only dedi¬
cation and study. And those among us who wish to
revive this legacy, and to draw the best conclusions
from it, so as to be armed with the strongest weapon
possible, need to embark upon the study of the Ara¬
bic encyclopedias such as [Kitab] al-aghani [Book of
Songs] by Abu Faraj al-Isfahani [897-967], Mu'jam
al-udaba’ [Literary Biographies ] by Yaqut [al-Rumi]
al-Hamawi [circa 1179-1229], Wafayatal-a‘yan [Late
Greats] by the judge Ibn Khallikan [1211-1282], and
Subh al-a‘sha [Daybreak for the Sujferer of Night-
Blindness] by [Shihabuddin Ahmad] al-Qalqashandi
[1355-1418]. And they need also to embark upon the
study of the fundamentals of Arabic literature such as
Kamil [fi al-adab] [Literary Perfection] by [Muham¬
mad] al-Mubarrad [died 898], Adab al-katib [The Art
of the Scribe] by [Abu Muhammad] Ibn Qutayba
[828-889], Bayan wa al-tabyin [Rhetoric and Clari¬
fication] by al-Jahiz [circa 776-869], and others, too
many to enumerate. In this way they will come to
comprehend gradually the spirit of Arabic Islamic lit¬
erature, to be dedicated to the service of the language
of the ancestors, and to grasp the subject matter. Lit¬
erature in its entirety is but subject matter and style.
The subject matter comprises the different subjects
100 Muhammad Ahmad Mahjub
treated by literary- figures, which differ according to
time and place. And the style is the way these subjects
are treated. [...]
We have followed the intellectual movement in this
country from ancient times until today, and we have
seen the various states and the succession of civiliza¬
tions that this nation has undergone and the creeds and
beliefs adopted by its offspring. We have seen the
cultures to which the nation was introduced, to which
its people were exposed. And we have seen that this
country and its people are the result of [different] blood
groups, some Negroid and some Arab, along with the
Turkish and the Abyssinian, and are bom out of [an
amalgam of] civilizations, among them the Pharaonic,
the ancient and modem Arab, and the Western. And
we have seen that they [the people of this country]
worshiped the gods of the ancient Egyptians and
adopted Christianity for a long period of time, and then
adopted Islam, the true religion, as its creed, which it
would not exchange for any other. It remains for us to
see which ideal the intellectual movement needs to
follow in this country.
The ideal vision that the intellectual movement
has to follow is for this country to have an Arab Is¬
lamic culture backed by an acquired Western culture.
They should be mutually supportive in creating a
proper national literature that takes the subject of its
artistic narrative from the dispositions of its people
and their traditions, that composes its verse and ap¬
peals to the sensitivity of this nation’s offspring by
describing the scenery of its jungles, the shining of
the silver moon in its deserts, its fertile valleys, and
the gazelles of its dunes, and finds in these the
sources for its artistic imagery. The feelings of the
people, their sensitivities, their movements and si¬
lences, are the sources for music. The ideal vision
gives attention to the writing of the history of this
country in a way that instills patriotism in its youth
and a sense of duty toward the land of the ancestors.
The propagators of this literature should circulate
useful political research, so that the movement may
be transformed from a literary renaissance to a po¬
litical one, resulting in the independence of this coun¬
try—politically, socially, and intellectually.
This is our ideal: to protect our Islamic religion
and hold fast to our Arab heritage with complete tol¬
erance, a widened intellectual horizon, and an eager¬
ness to study other cultures. All these will revive our
national literature and arouse patriotic feelings, so to
build a political movement that cannot be refused,
because it is grows out of our essence. The goal we
are striding toward is our independence—political,
social, and intellectual.
This is our ideal. We must stride toward it and
work together to achieve it, and all work that is not
aimed at independence is worthless.
Come along! O youth of this generation, and its
opinion leaders, let us work together to establish this
ideal. Let us work to achieve it. Let us die, and the
generation after us will work to realize it. Such is the
eternal dream and the work of ages. Let the loyal,
selfless, dutiful, and visionary offspring of this coun¬
try work toward this ideal.
SECTION 2
Iran/Afghanistan
This page intentionally left blank
Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani
I I
Lecture on Teaching and Learning
and Answer to Renan
Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (Iran, 1838-1897) was perhaps the most famous propo¬
nent of modernist Islam, and has enjoyed the stablest popularity of all modernists in the
century since his death, Born in Asadabad in northwestern Iran, he adopted the name
“Afghani" in order to distance himself from his Shi'i origins. He was educated at seminar¬
ies in Iran and Iraq, then studied modern sciences in India before coming to prominence
as a royal adviser in Afghanistan in the late 1860s. Upon his expulsion, Jamal al-Din then
spent a decade associated with academic reform—briefly in Istanbul, then for almost a
decade in Cairo, before being expelled yet again. He spent much of the 1880s in Eu¬
rope—in Paris, where he published the famous journal al-'Urwa al-wuthqa (The Strongest
Link ) with Muhammad ‘Abduh (see chapter 3); and later in Russia, His final years were
spent as a would-be adviser to the rulers of Iran and, after yet another expulsion, the
Ottoman Empire, though both monarchs were suspicious of his loyalty and piety. As with
his name, Jamal al-Din reinvented his political positions when necessary—supporting and
opposing absolute monarchy, for example, and denouncing and offering to assist the British
Empire. His consistent aim, however, was to revive the power and image of the Islamic
world through modem-style reforms. The texts presented here—addressed to Hindus,
in the first selection, and Chnstians in the second—offer Jamal al-Din's view that Muslims
can and must adopt modern science as a means of civilizational survival. 1
Lecture on Teaching and Learning
On Thursday, November 8 [1882], in Albert Hall,
Calcutta, he said: [...]
Allow me to express my pleasure that so many In¬
dian youths are here, all adorned with virtue and at¬
tainments, and all making great efforts to acquire
knowledge. Certainly I must be happy to see such
offspring of India, since they are the offshoots of that
India that was the cradle of humanity. Human val¬
ues spread out from India to the whole world. These
youths are from the very land where the meridian
circle was first determined. They are from the same
realm that first understood the zodiac. Everyone
Sayyid Jamal ad-Din al-Afghani, An Islamic Response to
Imperialism: Political and Religious Writings of Sayyid
Jamal ad-Din al-Afghani , translated from Persian and French
by Nikki R. Keddie (Berkeley: University of California Press,
1968), pp. 101-108, 181-187. The first selection was a lec¬
ture delivered in 1882; the second piece was first published
in 1883. Introduction by Charles Kurzman.
knows that the determination of these two circles is
impossible until perfection in geometry is achieved.
Thus we can say that the Indians were the inventors
of arithmetic and geometry. Note how Indian numer¬
als were transferred from here to the Arabs, and from
there to Europe.
These youths are also the sons of a land that was
the source of all the laws and rules of the world. If
one observes closely, he will see that the “Code
Romain,” the mother of all Western codes, was taken
from the four vedas and the shastras. The Greeks
were the pupils of the Indians in literary ideas, lim¬
pid poetry, and lofty thoughts. One of these pupils,
Pythagoras [Greek mathematician, circa 569^475
b.c.], spread sciences and wisdom in Greece and
reached such a height that his word was accepted
without proof as an inspiration from heaven.
1. Nikki R. Keddie, Sayyid Jamal ad-Din “al-Afghani":
A Political Biography (Berkeley: University of California
Press, 1972); Elie Kedourie, Afghani and ‘Abduh: An Essay
on Religious Unbelief and Political Activism in Modem Islam
(London: Cass, 1966).
103
104 Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani
[The Indians] reached the highest level in philo¬
sophic thought. The soil of India is the same soil; the
air of India is the same air; and these youths who are
present here are fruits of the same earth and climate.
So I am very happy that they, having awakened after
a long sleep, are reclaiming their inheritance and
gathering the fruits of their own tree.
Now I would like to speak of science, teaching,
and learning. How difficult it is to speak about sci¬
ence. There is no end or limit to science. The bene¬
fits of science are immeasurable; and these finite
thoughts cannot encompass what is infinite. Besides,
thousands of eloquent speakers and sages have al¬
ready expressed their thoughts to explain science and
its nobility. Despite this, nature does not permit me
not to explain its virtues.
Thus I say. If someone looks deeply into the ques¬
tion, he will see that science rules the world. There
was, is, and will be no ruler in the world but science.
If we look at the Chaldean conquerors, like Semi-
ramis [Sammu-ramat, Assyrian queen, ninth century
b.c.], who reached the borders of Tatary and India,
the hue conquerors were not the Chaldeans but sci¬
ence and knowledge.
The Egyptians who increased their realm, and
Ramses II [Egyptian king, ruled 1279-1213 B.c.],
called Sosestris, who reached Mesopotamia accord¬
ing to some and India according to others—it was not
the Egyptians but science that did it. The Phoenicians
who, with their ships, gradually made colonies of the
British Isles, Spain, Portugal, and Greece—in reality
it was science, not the Phoenicians, which so expanded
their power. Alexander [Macedonian king, 356-323
b.c.] never came to India or conquered the Indians;
rather what conquered the Indians was science.
The Europeans have now put their hands on every
part of the world. The English have reached Afghani¬
stan; the French have seized Tunisia. In reality this
usurpation, aggression, and conquest have not come
from the French or the English. Rather it is science
that everywhere manifests its greatness and power.
Ignorance had no alternative to prostrating itself
humbly before science and acknowledging its sub¬
mission. In reality, sovereignty has never left the
abode of science. However, this true ruler, which is
science, is continually changing capitals. Sometimes
it has moved from East to West, and other times from
West to East. More than this, if we study the riches
of the world, we learn that wealth is the result of
commerce, industry, and agriculture. Agriculture is
achieved only with agricultural science, botanical
chemistry, and geometry. Industry is produced only
with physics, chemistry, mechanics, geometry, and
mathematics; and commerce is based on agriculture
and industry.
Thus it is evident that all wealth and riches are the
result of science. There are no riches in the world
without science, and there is no wealth in the world
other than science. In sum, the whole world of hu¬
manity is an industrial world, meaning that the world
is a world of science. If science were removed from
the human sphere, no man would continue to remain
in the world.
Since it is thus, science makes one man have the
strength of ten, one hundred, one thousand, and ten
thousand persons. The acquisitions of men for them¬
selves and their governments are proportional to their
science. Thus, every government for its own benefit
must strive to lay the foundation of the sciences and
to disseminate knowledge. Just as an individual who
has an orchard must, for his own profit, work to level
the ground and improve its trees and plants accord¬
ing to the laws of agronomy, just so rulers, for their
own benefit, must strive for the dissemination of the
sciences. Just as, if the owner of an orchard neglects
to tend it according to the laws of agronomy, the loss
will revert to him, so, if a ruler neglects the dissemi¬
nation of the sciences among his subjects, the harm
will revert to that government. What advantage is
there to a Zulu king from ruling a society poor and
barefoot, and how can one call such a government a
government?
As the nobility of science has been somewhat
clarified, we now wish to say some words about the
relations between science, teaching, and learning.
You must know that each science has a special sub¬
ject and deals with nothing but the necessities and
accidents of that special subject. For example, phys¬
ics treats the special features of bodies that exist in
the external world, and with its own special quali¬
ties, and does not enter into other matters that are
necessary to the human world. Kimiya, or “chemis¬
try,” speaks of the special features of bodies with
regard to analysis and composition. Plant science, or
“botany,” fixes only plants as the subject of its dis¬
cussion. Arithmetic deals with separate quantities and
geometry with interconnected quantities, and simi¬
larly the other sciences. None of these sciences deals
with matters outside its own subject.
If we observe well, we will learn that each one
TEACHING AND LEARNING AND ANSWER TO RENAN
105
of these sciences whose subject is a special matter
is like a limb of the body of science. Not one of them
can maintain its existence individually and sepa¬
rately, or be the cause of benefit for the human
world. For the existence of each one of these sci¬
ences is related to another science, like the relation
of arithmetic to geometry.
This need of one science for other sciences can¬
not be understood from the one science itself. Thus
it is that if that science were isolated, progress would
not be achieved in it, nor would it remain stable. Thus
a science is needed to be the comprehensive soul
for all the sciences, so that it can preserve their ex¬
istence, apply each of them in its proper place, and
become the cause of the progress of each one of those
sciences.
The science that has the position of a comprehen¬
sive soul and the rank of a preserving force is the
science of falsafa, or “philosophy,” because its sub¬
ject is universal. It is philosophy that shows man
human prerequisites. It shows the sciences what is
necessary. It employs each of the sciences in its
proper place.
If a community did not have philosophy, and all
the individuals of that community were learned in the
sciences with particular subjects, those sciences
could not last in that community for a century, that
is, a hundred years. That community without the
spirit of philosophy could not deduce conclusions
from these sciences.
The Ottoman Government and the Khedivate of
Egypt have been opening schools for the teaching of
the new sciences for a period of sixty years, and until
now they have not received any benefit from those
sciences. The reason is that teaching the philosophi¬
cal sciences was impossible in those schools, and
because of the nonexistence of philosophy, no fruit
was obtained from those sciences that are like limbs.
Undoubtedly, if the spirit of philosophy had been in
those schools during this period of sixty years, they
themselves, independent of the European countries,
would have striven to reform their kingdoms in ac¬
cord with science. Also, they would not send their
sons each year to European countries for education,
and they would not invite teachers from there to their
schools. I may say that if the spirit of philosophy were
found in a community, even if that community did
not have one of those sciences whose subject is par¬
ticular, undoubtedly their philosophic spirit would
call for the acquisition of all the sciences.
The first Muslims had no science, but, thanks to
the Islamic religion, a philosophic spirit arose among
them, and owing to that philosophic spirit they began
to discuss the general affairs of the world and human
necessities. This was why they acquired in a short
time all the sciences with particular subjects that they
translated from the Syriac, Persian, and Greek into
the Arabic language at the time of [Abu Ja'farJ Man¬
sur Davanaqi [caliph, 754-775J. 2
It is philosophy that makes man understandable
to man, explains human nobility, and shows man the
proper road. The first defect appearing in any nation
that is headed toward decline is in the philosophic
spirit. After that, deficiencies spread into the other
sciences, arts, and associations.
As the relationship between the preeminence of
philosophy and the sciences has been explained, we
now wish to say something about the quality of teach¬
ing and learning among the Muslims. Thus, I say that
the Muslims these days do not see any benefit from
their education. For example, they study grammar,
and the purpose of grammar is that someone who has
acquired the Arabic language be capable of speak¬
ing and writing. The Muslims now make grammar a
goal in itself. For long years they expend philo¬
sophic thought on grammar to no avail, and after fin¬
ishing they are unable to speak, write, or understand
Arabic.
Rhetoric, which they call “literature,” is the sci¬
ence that enables a man to become a writer, speaker,
and poet. However, we see these days that after
studying that science they are incapable of correct¬
ing their everyday speech.
Logic, which is the balance for ideas, should make
everyone who acquires it capable of distinguishing
every truth from falsehood and every right from
wrong. However, we see that the minds of our Mus¬
lim logicians are full of every superstition and van¬
ity, and no difference exists between their ideas and
the ideas of the masses of the bazaar.
Philosophy is the science that deals with the state
of external beings, and their causes, reasons, needs,
and requisites. It is strange that our 'ulanta' [religious
scholars] read Sadra [that is, Shark al- Hidaya , or
Explanation of “Guidance, ” by Mulla Sadra, 1571—
1640] and Shams al-bari‘a [probably Shams al-
bazigha. The Rising Sun, by Mahmud Jawnpuri
2. [In fact, the main translations were done later under
al-Ma'mun (caliph, 813-833).—Trans.]
106 Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani
Faruqi, died 1652] and vaingloriously call them¬
selves sages, and despite this they cannot distinguish
their left hand from their right hand, and they do not
ask: Who are we and what is right and proper for us?
They never ask the causes of electricity, the steam¬
boat, and railroads.
Even stranger, from early evening until morning
they study the Shams al-bari‘a with a lamp placed
before them, and they do not once consider why if
we remove its glass cover, much smoke comes out
of it, and when we leave the glass, there is no smoke.
Shame on such a philosopher, and shame on such
philosophy! A philosopher is someone whose mind
is stimulated by all the events and parts of the world,
not one who travels along a road like a blind man who
does not know where its beginning and end are.
Jurisprudence among the Muslims includes all
domestic, municipal, and state laws. Thus a person
who has studied jurisprudence profoundly is worthy
of being prime minister of the realm or chief ambas¬
sador of the state, whereas we see our jurisconsults
after studying this science unable to manage their
own households, although they are proud of their
own foolishness.
The science of principles consists of the philoso¬
phy of the shari ‘a, or “philosophy of law.” In it are
explained the truth regarding right and wrong, benefit
and loss, and the causes for the promulgation of laws.
Certainly, a person who studies this science should
be capable of establishing laws and enforcing civili¬
zation. However, we see that those who study this
science among the Muslims are deprived of under¬
standing of the benefits of laws, the rules of civili¬
zation, and the reform of the world.
Since the state of these ‘ulama' has been demon¬
strated, we can say that our ‘ulama’ at this time are
like a very narrow wick, on top of which is a very
small flame that neither lights its surroundings nor
gives light to others. A scholar is a true light if he is
a scholar. Thus, if a scholar is a scholar he must shed
light on the whole world, and if his light does not
reach the whole world, at least it should light up his
region, his city, his village, or his home. What kind
of scholar is it who does not enlighten even his own
home?
The strangest thing of all is that our ‘ulama ’ these
days have divided science into two parts. One they
call Muslim science, and one European science.
Because of this they forbid others to teach some of
the useful sciences. They have not understood that
science is that noble thing that has no connection with
any nation, and is not distinguished by anything but
itself. Rather, everything that is known is known by
science, and every nation that becomes renowned
becomes renowned through science. Men must be
related to science, not science to men.
How very strange it is that the Muslims study those
sciences that are ascribed to Aristotle [Greek philoso¬
pher, circa 384-322 b.c.] with the greatest delight, as
if Aristotle were one of the pillars of the Muslims.
However, if the discussion relates to Galileo [Italian
astronomer, 1564-1642], [Isaac] Newton [English
physicist, 1642-1727], and [Johannes] Kepler [Ger¬
man astronomer, 1571-1630], they consider them
infidels.
The father and mother of science is proof, and
proof is neither Aristotle nor Galileo. The truth is
where there is proof, and those who forbid science
and knowledge in the belief that they are safeguard¬
ing the Islamic religion are really the enemies of that
religion. The Islamic religion is the closest of reli¬
gions to science and knowledge, and there is no in¬
compatibility between science and knowledge and
the foundation of the Islamic faith.
As for [Abu Hamid Muhammad] Ghazzali [1058—
1111], who was called the Proof of Islam, he says in
the book Munqidh min al-dalal (The Deliverer from
Error) that someone who claims that the Islamic re¬
ligion is incompatible with geometric proofs, philo¬
sophical demonstrations, and the laws of nature is
an ignorant friend of Islam. The harm of this igno¬
rant friend to Islam is greater than the harm of the
heretics and enemies of Islam. For the laws of na¬
ture, geometric proofs, and philosophic demonstra¬
tions are self-evident truths. Thus, someone who says,
“My religion is inconsistent with self-evident truths,”
has inevitably passed judgment on the falsity of his
religion.
The first education obtained by man was religious
education, since philosophical education can only be
obtained by a society that has studied some science
and is able to understand proofs and demonstrations.
Hence we can say that reform will never be achieved
by the Muslims except if the leaders of our religion
first reform themselves and gather the fruits of their
science and knowledge.
If one considers, one will understand this truth,
that the ruin and corruption we have experienced first
reached our ‘ulama’ and religious leaders, and then
penetrated the rest of the community.
TEACHING AND LEARNING AND ANSWER TO RENAN
107
I now wish to excuse myself, since, contrary to
his promise, the principal caused this talk to be de¬
livered only in an abbreviated form.
Answer of Jamal ad-Din to Renan
Sir,
I have read in your estimable journal of last March
29 [1883] a talk on Islam and Science, given in the
Sorbonne before a distinguished audience by the
great thinker of our time, the illustrious M[onsieur]
[Ernest] Renan [French Orientalist, 1823-1892],
whose renown has filled the West and penetrated into
the farthest countries of the East. Since this speech
suggested to me some observations, I took the lib¬
erty of formulating them in this letter, which I have
the honor of addressing to you with a request that you
accommodate it in your columns.
Monsieur Renan wanted to clarify a point of the
history of the Arabs which had remained unclear until
now and to throw a live light on their past, a light
that may be somewhat troubling for those who ven¬
erate these people, though one cannot say that he has
usurped the place and rank that they formerly occu¬
pied in the world. Monsieur Renan has not at all tried,
we believe, to destroy the glory of the Arabs, which
is indestructible; he has applied himself to discover¬
ing historical truth and making it known to those who
do not know it, as well as to those who study the
influence of religions in the history of nations, and
in particular in that of civilization. I hasten to rec¬
ognize that Monsieur Renan has acquitted himself
marvelously of this very difficult task, in citing cer¬
tain facts that have passed unnoticed until this time.
I find in his talk remarkable observations, new per¬
ceptions, and an indescribable charm. However, I
have under my eyes only a more or less faithful trans¬
lation of this talk. If I had had the opportunity to read
it in the French text, I could have penetrated better
the ideas of this great thinker. He receives my humble
salutation as an homage that is due him and as
the sincere expression of my admiration. I would say
to him, finally, in these circumstances, what al-
Mutanabbi [915-965], a poet who loved philosophy
wrote several centuries ago to a high personage
whose actions he celebrated: “Receive,” he said to
him, “the praises that I can give you; do not force me
to bestow on you the praises that you merit.”
Monsieur Renan’s talk covered two principal
points. The eminent philosopher applied himself to
proving that the Muslim religion was by its very es¬
sence opposed to the development of science, and
that the Arab people, by their nature, do not like ei¬
ther metaphysical sciences or philosophy. This pre¬
cious plant, Monsieur Renan seems to say, dried in
their hands as if burnt up by the breath of the desert
wind. But after reading this talk one cannot refrain
from asking oneself if these obstacles come uniquely
from the Muslim religion itself or from the manner
in which it was propagated in the world; from the
character, manners, and aptitudes of the peoples who
adopted this religion, or of those on whose nations
it was imposed by force. It is no doubt the lack of
time that kept Monsieur Renan from elucidating these
points; but the harm is no less for that, and if it is
difficult to determine its causes in a precise manner
and by irrefutable proofs, it is even more difficult to
indicate the remedy.
As to the first point, I will say that no nation at its
origin is capable of letting itself be guided by pure
reason. Haunted by terrors that it cannot escape, it is
incapable of distinguishing good from evil, of distin¬
guishing that which could make it happy from that
which might be the unfailing source of its unhap¬
piness and misfortune. It does not know, in a word,
either how to trace back causes or to discern effects.
This lacuna means that it cannot be led either by
force or persuasion to practice the actions that would
perhaps be the most profitable for it, or to avoid what
is harmful. It was therefore necessary that humanity
look outside itself for a place of refuge, a peaceful
comer where its tormented conscience could find
repose. It was then that there arose some educator or
other who, not having, as I said above, the necessary
power to force humanity to follow the inspirations
of reason, hurled it into the unknown and opened to
it vast horizons where the imagination was pleased,
and where it found, if not the complete satisfaction
of its desires, at least an unlimited field for its hopes.
And, since humanity, at its origin, did not know the
causes of the events that passed under its eyes and
the secrets of things, it was perforce led to follow the
advice of its teachers and the orders they gave. This
obedience was imposed in the name of the supreme
Being to whom the educators attributed all events,
without permitting men to discuss its utility or its
disadvantages. This is no doubt for man one of the
heaviest and most humiliating yokes, as I recognize;
108 Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani
but one cannot deny that it is by this religious edu¬
cation, whether it be Muslim, Christian, or pagan,
that all nations have emerged from barbarism and
marched toward a more advanced civilization.
If it is true that the Muslim religion is an obstacle
to the development of sciences, can one affirm that this
obstacle will not disappear someday? How does the
Muslim religion differ on this point from other reli¬
gions? All religions are intolerant, each one in its way.
The Christian religion (I mean the society that follows
its inspirations and its teachings and is formed in its
image) has emerged from the first period to which I
have just alluded; thenceforth free and independent,
it seems to advance rapidly on the road of progress and
science, whereas Muslim society has not yet freed it¬
self from the tutelage of religion. Realizing, however,
that the Christian religion preceded the Muslim reli¬
gion in the world by many centuries, I cannot keep
from hoping that Muhammadan society will succeed
someday in breaking its bonds and marching resolutely
in the path of civilization after the manner of Western
society, for which the Christian faith, despite its rig¬
ors and intolerance, was not at all an invincible ob¬
stacle. No, I cannot admit that this hope be denied to
Islam. I plead here with Monsieur Renan not the cause
of the Muslim religion, but that of several hundreds
of millions of men, who would thus be condemned to
live in barbarism and ignorance.
In truth, the Muslim religion has tried to stifle
science and stop its progress. It has thus succeeded
in halting the philosophical or intellectual movement
and in turning minds from the search for scientific
truth. A similar attempt, if I am not mistaken, was
made by the Christian religion, and the venerated
leaders of the Catholic church have not yet disarmed
so far as I know. They continue to fight energetically
against what they call the spirit of vertigo and error.
I know all the difficulties that the Muslims will have
to surmount to achieve the same degree of civiliza¬
tion, access to the truth with the help of philosophic
and scientific methods being forbidden them. A true
believer must, in fact, turn from the path of studies
that have for their object scientific truth, studies on
which all truth must depend, according to an opin¬
ion accepted at least by some people in Europe.
Yoked, like an ox to the plow, to the dogma whose
slave he is, he must walk eternally in the furrow that
has been traced for him in advance by the interpret¬
ers of the law. Convinced, besides, that his religion
contains in itself all morality and all sciences, he at¬
taches himself resolutely to it and makes no effort to
go beyond.
Why should he exhaust himself in vain attempts?
What would be the benefit of seeking truth when he
believes he possesses it all? Will he be happier on
the day when he has lost his faith, the day when he
has stopped believing that all perfections are in the
religion he practices and not in another? Wherefore
he despises science. I know all this, but I know
equally that this Muslim and Arab child whose por¬
trait Monsieur Renan traces in such vigorous terms
and who, at a later age, becomes “a fanatic, full of
foolish pride in possessing what he believes to be
absolute truth,”’ belongs to a race that has marked
its passage in the world, not only by fire and blood,
but by brilliant and fruitful achievements that prove
its taste for science, for all the sciences, including
philosophy (with which, I must recognize, it was
unable to live happily for long).
I am led here to speak of the second point that
Monsieur Renan treated in his lecture with an incon¬
testable authority. No one denies that the Arab
people, while still in the state of barbarism, rushed
into the road of intellectual and scientific progress
with a rapidity only equaled by the speed of its con¬
quests, since in the space of a century, it acquired and
assimilated almost all the Greek and Persian sciences
that had developed slowly during several centuries
on their native soil, just as it extended its domina¬
tion from the Arabian peninsula up to the mountains
of the Himalaya and the summit of the Pyrenees.
One might say that in all this period the sciences
made astonishing progress among the Arabs and in
all the countries under their domination. Rome and
Byzantium were then the seats of theological and
philosophical sciences, as well as the shining center
and burning hearth of all human knowledge. Having
followed for several centuries the path of civilization,
the Greeks and Romans walked with assurance over
the vast field of science and philosophy. There came,
however, a time when their researches were aban¬
doned and their studies interrupted.
The monuments they had built to science collapsed,
and their most precious books were relegated to
oblivion. The Arabs, ignorant and barbaric as they
were in origin, took up what had been abandoned by
the civilized nations, rekindled the extinguished sci¬
ences, developed them and gave them a brilliance they
had never had. Is not this the index and proof of their
natural love for sciences? It is true that the Arabs took
TEACHING AND LEARNING AND ANSWER TO RENAN
109
from the Greeks their philosophy as they stripped the
Persians of what made their fame in antiquity; but
these sciences, which they usurped by right of con¬
quest, they developed, extended, clarified, perfected,
completed, and coordinated with a perfect taste and a
rare precision and exactitude. Besides, the French, the
Germans, and the English were not so far from Rome
and Byzantium as were the Arabs, whose capital was
Baghdad. It was therefore easier for the former to ex¬
ploit the scientific treasures that were buried in these
two great cities. They made no effort in this direction
until Arab civilization lit up with its reflections the
summits of the Pyrenees and poured its light and riches
on the Occident. The Europeans welcomed Aristotle,
who had emigrated and become Arab; but they did not
think of him at all when he was Greek and their neigh¬
bor. Is there not in this another proof, no less evident,
of the intellectual superiority of the Arabs and of their
natural attachment to philosophy? It is true that after
the fall of the Arab kingdom in the Orient as in the
Occident, the countries that had become the great cen¬
ters of science, like Iraq and Andalusia, fell again into
ignorance and became the center of religious fanati¬
cism; but one cannot conclude from this sad spectacle
that the scientific and philosophic progress of the
Middle Ages was not due to the Arab people who ruled
at that time.
Monsieur Renan does do them this justice. He rec¬
ognizes that the Arabs conserved and maintained for
centuries the hearth of science. What nobler mission
for a people! But while recognizing that from about
a.d. 775 to near the middle of the thirteenth century,
that is to say during about 500 years, there were in
Muslim countries very distinguished scholars and
thinkers, and that during this period the Muslim world
was superior in intellectual culture to the Christian
world, Monsieur Renan has said that the philosophers
of the first centuries of Islam as well as the statesmen
who became famous in this period were mostly from
Harran [in Anatolia], from Andalusia, and from Iran.
There were also among them Transoxianan and
Syrian priests. I do not wish to deny the great quali¬
ties of the Persian scholars nor the role that they played
in the Arab world; but permit me to say that the
Harranians were Arabs and that the Arabs in occupy¬
ing Spain and Andalusia did not lose their national¬
ity; they remained Arabs. Several centuries before
Islam the Arabic language was that of the Harranians.
The fact that they preserved their former religion,
Sabaeanism, does not mean they should be considered
foreign to the Arab nationality. The Syrian priests were
also for the most part Ghassanian Arabs converted to
Christianity.
As for Ibn Bajja [Andalusia-Morocco, circa 1106-
1138], Ibn Rushd (Averroes) [Andalusia-Morocco,
1126-1198], and [Abu Bakr Muhammad] Ibn Tufayl
[Andalusia-Morocco, circa 1110-1185], one cannot
say that they are not just as Arab as [Abu Yusuf
Ya'qub] al-Kindi [Arabia, circa 801-866] because
they were not bom in Arabia, especially if one is
willing to consider that human races are only distin¬
guished by their language, and that if this distinction
should disappear, nations would not take long to
forget their diverse origins. The Arabs who put their
arms in the service of the Muslim religion, and who
were simultaneously warriors and apostles, did not
impose their language on the defeated, and wherever
they established themselves, they preserved it for
them with a jealous care. No doubt Islam, in penetrat¬
ing the conquered countries with the violence that is
known, transplanted there its language, its manners,
and its doctrine, and these countries could not thence¬
forth avoid influence. Iran is an example; but it is
possible that in going back to the centuries preced¬
ing the appearance of Islam, one would find that the
Arabic language was not then entirely unknown to
Persian scholars. The expansion of Islam gave it, it
is true, a new scope, and the Persian scholars con¬
verted to the Muhammadan faith thought it an honor
to write their books in the language of the Qur’an.
The Arabs cannot, no doubt, claim for themselves the
glory that renders these writers illustrious, but we
believe that they do not need this claim; they have
among themselves enough celebrated scholars and
writers. What would happen if, going back to the first
period of Arab domination, we followed step by step
the first group from which was formed this conquer¬
ing people who spread their power over the world,
and if, eliminating everything that is outside this
group and its descendants, we did not take into ac¬
count either the influence it exercised on minds or
the impulse it gave to the sciences? Would we not
be led, thus, no longer to recognize in conquering
peoples other virtues or merits than those that flow
from the material fact of conquest? All conquered
peoples would then regain their moral autonomy and
would attribute to themselves all glory, no part of
which could be legitimately claimed by the power
that fructified and developed these germs. Thus, Italy
would come to say to France that neither [Cardinal
I 10 Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani
Jules] Mazarin [1602-1661] nor [Emperor Napoleon]
Bonaparte [1769-1821] belonged to her; Germany or
England would in turn claim the scholars who, hav¬
ing come to France, made its professorships illustri¬
ous and enhanced the brilliance of its scientific re¬
nown. The French, on their side, would claim for
themselves the glory of the offspring of those illustri¬
ous families who, after [the revocation of] the edict of
Nantes [in 1685], emigrated to all Europe. And if all
Europeans belong to the same stock, one can with
justice claim that the Harranians and the Syrians, who
are Semites, belong equally to the great Arab family.
It is permissible, however, to ask oneself why
Arab civilization, after having been thrown in such
a live light on the world, suddenly became extin¬
guished; why this torch has not been relit since, and
why the Arab world still remains buried in profound
darkness. Here the responsibility of the Muslim reli¬
gion appears complete. It is clear that wherever it
became established, this religion tried to stifle the
sciences, and it was marvelously served in its designs
by despotism.
[Jalal al-Din] al-Suyuti [Egyptian scholar, 1445-
1505] tells that the Caliph [Musa] al-Hadi [reigned
785-786] put to death in Baghdad 5,000 philoso¬
phers in order to destroy sciences in the Muslim
countries down to their roots. Admitting that this
historian exaggerated the number of victims, it re¬
mains nonetheless established that this persecution
took place, and it is a bloody stain for the history of
a religion, as it is for the history of a people. I could
find in the past of the Christian religion analogous
facts. Religions, by whatever names they are called,
all resemble each other. No agreement and no recon¬
ciliation are possible between these religions and
philosophy. Religion imposes on man its faith and
its belief, whereas philosophy frees him of it totally
or in part. How could one therefore hope that they
would agree with each other? When the Christian
religion, under the most modest and seductive forms,
entered Athens and Alexandria, which were, as every¬
one knows, the two principal centers of science and
philosophy, after becoming solidly es-tablished in
these two cities its first concern was to put aside real
science and philosophy, trying to stifle both under
the bushes of theological discussions, to explain the
inexplicable mysteries of the Trinity, the Incarnation,
and Transubstantiation. It will always be thus. When¬
ever religion will have the upper hand, it will elimi¬
nate philosophy; and the contrary happens when it
is philosophy that reigns as sovereign mistress. So
long as humanity exists, the struggle will not cease
between dogma and free investigation, between re¬
ligion and philosophy; a desperate struggle in which,
I fear, the triumph will not be for free thought, be¬
cause the masses dislike reason, and its teachings are
only understood by some intelligences of the elite,
and because, also, science, however beautiful it is,
does not completely satisfy humanity, which thirsts
for the ideal and which likes to exist in dark and dis¬
tant regions that the philosophers and scholars can
neither perceive nor explore.
12
Mirza Malkum Khan
The Law
Mirza Malkum Khan (Iran, 1833-1908) was an activist and pamphleteer who, in different
periods of his life, alternately served and agitated against the Iranian monarchy, Born in
the Armenian town of Julfa, next to Isfahan, Malkum and his father converted to Islam,
but retained certain Christian practices. Malkum was educated in France on a govern¬
ment scholarship, and returned to Iran to teach at the country’s first modem-style school,
the Dar al-Funun (House of Sciences). A decade later, he was exiled for organizing se¬
cret societies devoted to freedom and equality—then hired the following year in the
Iranian diplomatic service, rising to the post of ambassador in London. When he was
fired in 1889 in a scandal over a proposed Iranian lottery, Malkum devoted himself to a
journal called Qanun (The Law), which campaigned on behalf of constitutionalism. This
journal, appearing periodically in forty-two issues over a decade, was smuggled into Iran,
where its popularity threw the shah into “paroxysms of irritation and alarm,” according
to the British ambassador. The journal inspired the makers of the Iranian Constitutional
Revolution of 1906, yet Malkum played no direct role in that movement, as he had ceased
his oppositional activities upon reappointment to diplomatic service, as ambassador to
Italy, in 1899, Issue number 10 of Qanun, translated here in its entirety—probably writ¬
ten entirely by Malkum, including the purported letters to the editor—demonstrates
Malkum's vivid prose and some of his charactenstic themes, including the necessity of
conspiracy to promote the rule of Law. 1
O intimate members of the royal household, O exalted
courtiers of the shah! O ministers, O dignitaries of the
state! Why don’t you tell the shah, clearly and dis¬
tinctly, how things really are? You who know what
anger has gathered in the hearts of the people. You
know how much the servants and subjects are subject
to harassment. You know the level to which the prov¬
inces have been reduced. You see the ruthlessness with
which the income of the state and the nation is being
plundered. You know how ambassadors and all the
Westerners trample on our rights. You know to what
extent the existence of the state and the health of the
monarchy are being shaken. A thousand times you
have confided to one another that this cannot continue.
So why haven’t you told the shah of these matters?
You say you are afraid that such words will displease
the shah. Then what is the meaning of loyalty to the
Malkum Khan, Qanun (The Law), London, England, No. 10,
circa 1890. Translation from Persian and introduction by
Charles Kurzman. Thanks to Mahmoud Sadri for translation
assistance.
1. Hamid Algar, Mirza Malkum Khan (Berkeley: Univer¬
sity of California Press, 1973); Edward G. Brown, The Press
state? If you place personal safety over the interests
of the state, then what difference is there between the
aforementioned and cowardly traitors?
Look about you for a moment or two, and see how
many regimes are being overthrown in this age of
ours. How many monarchs are forced to flee. How
many thrones have toppled, how many dear souls
have been dragged through the dirt of degradation.
All these calamities would not have occurred, but for
the ruthlessness of the traitorous courtiers, who
would not permit their meek rulers to be freed for one
minute from the manacles of their sycophancy. If you
have a speck of honesty and justice in service to your
benefactor, these terrifying accounts would force you
to speak out instantly. And if, unfortunately, you do
not have enough manly candor to say openly how
things really are, have enough sense at least not to
and Poetry of Modern Persia (Cambridge. England: Cam¬
bridge University Press, 1914); Isma'il Ra'in, Mirza Malkum
Khan (Prince Malkum Khan ) (Tehran, Iran: Bungah-i
Matbu'ati-i Safi'alishah, 1971).
I 12 Mirza Malkum Khan
deny our words. Now that we have stumbled onto the
path of nationalist martyrdom, out of insanity or loy¬
alty, allow us to present the grievances of the speech¬
less masses to the royal court without your taunting
blows. Unless you want to maintain this good-
natured shah, this wise shah, this oppressed shah,
as leader of a group of enslaved beggars, allow—
allow—us to make the bearer of these eminent quali¬
ties the emperor of the people of Iran.
Ever since the sound of The Law has rung out, from
that moment the broken-hearted people of Iran have
understood that they have invisible champions in this
journal. On one hand, they have drowned us with pe¬
titions of grievance, and on the other hand they have
gladdened us with support and useful information.
A noble and wise officer, who has served this mu¬
nificent state for almost 40 years, writes from glori¬
ous Karbala [an Ottoman city, now in Iraq, site of an
important Shi'i Muslim shrine]:
Nothing remains in this life for me. My property
is gone. My reputation is gone. My servant’s wages
are gone. My family is gone. My brothers and kin¬
folk have all perished in the misfortune of service to
this state. There is no scoundrel who has not afflicted
me. There is no humiliation whose bitterness I have
not tasted. Now that I have reached here, after a thou¬
sand troubles, I don’t know which unbeliever to seek
refuge with, so that I may be released from the grasp
of these man-eating oppressors.
O dear brother, all of these calamities and bitternesses
that you recognize as your personal portion are the
lot of most of the people of Iran. What good is com¬
plaint and despair? Thousands were oppressed like
you, whimpered, were destroyed, and left. If you
truly think of yourself as having rights, as worthy of
better than this standing, in the name of God the arena
of Humanity 2 awaits you. With the talents and abili¬
ties that you have, not only can you save yourself,
but you have the power to revive a whole country.
For the thousand sacrifices that you foolishly made
in devotion to the oppressors of the age, spend one
2. [“Humanity,” in addition to denoting all people who
have achieved enlightenment, refers specifically to members
of the Society of Humanity, a secret organization that
Malkum Khan founded around 1890 in conjunction with his
journal Qanun. —Trans.]
in the service of Humanity. Then you will see the
poisons of misfortune change into tangible comforts
and moral pleasures for your enjoyment!
We, the people of Iran, do not have the right to ask
his imperial holiness why the state authorities have
killed thus-and-such a minister. Why so-and-so plun¬
dered these houses. Why our kingdom is being ru¬
ined so. Why our nation has been bound to such ab¬
ject servility.
His imperial highness would reply that you, the
people of Iran, deserve this servility. If you were
Men, if you had as much perception and zeal as other
countries’ women have, how would this handful of
ignorant ministers of mine be able to rule over you
so harshly and so confidently, you who number more
than 10 million? If you had the sense to consider
yourself Men, as others do, and to understand the
meaning of unity, at least as well as some animals
do, what foolish oppressor would dare to touch the
rights of your Humanity?
A prince with good sense, who belongs to the rank
of intimate courtiers of his royal majesty, writes:
You have lit an unusual lire. I see no head that
is not full of enthusiasm for the Law. All the royal
servants, who believed in Humanity less than any¬
one, have become great supporters of Humanity.
Whenever they find a safe spot, their conversation
is all praise and acclaim and yearning for the ad¬
vancement of Humanity. Some weak-willed friends,
who have become in spirit greater devotees of Hu¬
manity than we, have lately taken to slandering
Humanity as much as they can in the presence of
the shah, as a sort of taqiya [the Shi’i Muslim tra¬
dition of pious dissimulation]. But the depravity of
their plan quickly came to light. Now, whenever
someone speaks ill of Humanity and the founders
of The Law, the shah, with that cleverness and sly¬
ness of his, immediately recognizes the purpose of
such stupid hypocrisies.
But strangest of all is the rush of women toward
the advent of Humanity. It happens that most of our
noblewomen—in proportion with the intellect and
prudence that they have developed far more than the
men of our age—have perceived the meaning and vir¬
tues of Humanity far better than the men, that is, bet¬
ter than our non-men. My aunt—al-Saltana, in particu¬
lar, who has really become crazy in her enthusiasm for
this endeavor, has started a secret riot along with sev-
THE LAW
3
eral of her friends in the royal quarters, especially
among the highest ranks, that defies description.
Why should there be any surprise that the natural es¬
sence of the Iranians has appeared in this way, under
the harsh blows of these times? Nobody said that the
nation of this great race would remain buried forever
in this graveyard of misery. On the contrary, the reli¬
gious authorities and the masters of perspicacity have
told us repeatedly that these times of misfortune will
come to an end, and that the sun of enlightenment will
breathe a new spirit into this blessed land.
Some ignorant old people and some shameless ignora¬
muses say that they despair of this people. The cause
of this despair is their own idleness, not any defect in
the zeal of the nation. Show [me] the people of any
region of the earth who are more thirsty for progress
and fit for work than Iranians. Although the various
recent struggles of this kingdom have been fruitless,
the cause of this is that none of the knowledgeable
authorities divining the heavenly secrets have yet seen
fit to show clearly where the destination is, and which
path to take. Now that divine beneficence has opened
the gates of Humanity in all directions, what further
obstacles, what hesitations remain for the flowing
currents of this nation’s forces? Soon the rays of the
sun of Humanity shall leave no stone in this kingdom
numb and useless. Soon nobody will lack strength, as
in the time of Ignorance [that is, the pre-Islamic
period], and say, “Let us wait and see what the others
do.” Soon everyone of good sense will take on the
duties of Humanity, alone, without waiting for others
to act. You who read these words, you who call
yourself a human being, you who wish to have the
right to live in this world—for the defense of this right
and the proof of your Humanity, what fresh disgrace
are you awaiting, what miracles are you expecting
from others?
A youth educated at the Academy of Sciences and
Technology in Tehran [the leading modern-style
school in Iran] requests that we publish these ques¬
tions and answers here.
Why were this kingdom’s concessions not given to
the subjects of the kingdom?
Because we have decided that our subjects should
remain as poor as possible.
Why are the people not allowed to send their chil¬
dren abroad for education?
Because we want our subjects to be as ignorant and
blind as possible.
Why is the signature of other governments worth
millions, and that of our government not worth a
single coin?
Because our government, a thousand times a day,
spits on its pacts and contracts.
Why has the king himself gone to Europe three times
and not allowed his sons to go once in forty years?
Because it was decided that our princes should re¬
main ignorant, inconsequential, and useless.
Why are uneducated and untalented individuals pre¬
ferred to others?
Because we want the name and practice of science
and art to fall into complete disuse in Iran.
Why have we become such deniers of science and
enemies of wisdom?
Because science opens the people’s eyes, and when
the people find their voice and their courage, they
say, “We are not animals, we want to be Men like
others, we will defend our rights as Men.” And
this is certainly against the rules.
An individual from Isfahan writes,
“What is unlawful government?”
That which plunders its subjects at will, sells the
rights of the nation to any foreigner who wants them,
wastes the kingdom’s treasures on any base whim,
shamelessly exploits the salaries and claims of its
employees, brazenly denies its obligations and pacts,
and plucks out your eyes whenever it pleases, throws
your family in the street, confiscates your property,
and slits your stomach open.
What should we do to change this?
Become a human being and demand the Law.
We sincerely regret that we cannot respond person¬
ally to every one of the friends who have written on
these subjects. Here, we can only allude to some of
their statements in summary fashion. People of in¬
telligence will easily identify their specific answer
in these words that we set out.
m. d. The concession that you want to take from
the government is useless, because the signature
of our government is no longer worth anything.
a. j. The truth dawns where it is least expected.
a. n. It makes no sense for a man to be as fearful
as you are.
s. m. I will send it, on condition that for the time
being, you do not reveal how’ and where you re¬
ceived it.
I 14 Mirza Malkum Khan
a. s. Islam is the collection of divine laws, and
Humanity is the observance of these laws.
q. d. The remedy is just as you specified.
To all of the friends of The Law.
The office of The Law has relocated from its Lon¬
don address. The correspondence bureau has moved
closer to Iran. From now on, please send all materi¬
als to one of the correspondents of The Law in
Baghdad, Bombay, or Ashkabad.
O wise one of an exalted nature! What need is there
for me to specify your noble name in these pages? A
perceptive mind will have no trouble recognizing
immediately that my words are meant for you.
You know the truth. The state and our entire ex¬
istence have tumbled over a frightening precipice.
We in the societies of Men are shouting to wake
people up and prevent this terrible tragedy through
the grace of the strength of Humanity. You, the
noble child of the homeland, what right do you have
in this widespread crisis to say, like those other non¬
men, “What’s it to me?” Rest assured that up to this
day, you have been unaware of the reality and dig¬
nity of your destiny. Your mission in the world is
far loftier than the fanciful dreams that have ren¬
dered your true being useless. The numerous prac¬
tical difficulties have nothing to do with this. Those
individuals who hold high offices in the world, how
are they better than you? If you would only look into
your heart, your veins will testify that God created
you for service to this nation. Why are you waiting
to express your intrinsic nature, which was entrusted
to your being for this great purpose? A thousand
times you have wept bloody tears over the calami¬
ties of this dear homeland. For years you have
wished for an opportunity for service. Now that
divine will has appointed the rising sun of Human¬
ity, in a manifest miracle, as the means of saving
this kingdom, why do you hesitate to take up this
timeless mission? What are you afraid of? After this,
what heathen, what wretch could call into question
the purity of Humanity? What need have I to tell
you what sort of zealous disciples have undergone
what type of sacrifices in this alliance of mutual
support? You will soon be astonished and ecstatic
to witness the divine intention of religious duty and
the honor of erudition as the greatest of the 'ulama ’
[religious scholars] of Islam take up the leadership
of this army of prosperity. To light this path of de¬
liverance, what better torch than the science of the
Islamic authorities? To fortify the hearts of the
weak, what better reasoning than this word of en¬
lightenment? We proclaim from first to last that we
would never and in no way pretend to make a higher
claim. We have not told and will not tell anyone to
come and recognize us, to make offerings to us, or
to obey us. On the contrary, we tell all people to
make themselves a manifestation of Humanity, even
among the tradesmen and soldiers and others whom
no one counts among men of note. Everyone can
advance into this arena of Humanity. We are pre¬
pared to give ourselves in service to them, life and
limb. Why go this far? You who are reading these
words, whatever meaning name and position may
have for you, we accord you a higher meaning and
position, and readily offer you the glad tidings that
from this moment on, commanded by divine decree,
you are appointed to the absolute trusteeship of
these pages [that is, of the journal].
The performance of this great mission is to be
devoted entirely to the knowledge and competence
of your exalted soul. Among the largest services that
the spirit of Humanity expects from that noble per¬
son, we draw your lofty attention specifically to the
four following items.
First, bring the copies of The Law in an appropri¬
ate way to whatever places and people you see fit.
Second, appoint the trusteeship of Humanity to
whatever person you deem deserving, with sufficient
training, from among the ‘ulama’, the learned ones,
and distinguished Men.
Third, because women in every kingdom and all
eras have been the best proponents of the advance¬
ment of truth, particularly higher knowledge, it is
incumbent upon you to appoint good and pure mem¬
bers of this respected half of the nation, by all legiti¬
mate means, as master of their sex and instigators of
popular zeal.
Fourth, because some agents have lost all their
possessions during their service to Humanity, and
in fact have become spiritual martyrs for these
truths, equity and manly duty demand that you
strive to lend them assistance and relief to the ex¬
tent of your powers of generosity. Furthermore, take
great care that all members of Humanity give ma¬
terial aid, if only one dinar a month, to especially
needy trustees.
THE LAW
What more can we say that your intellect and zeal
have not already recognized? Beyond this, what need
have we to impose on your noble time by reminding
you of these things, by letter or in person? With all
respect, and utmost pity, we urge you to take note if.
I 15
at this point, at this very moment, the spirit of Hu¬
manity takes flight in the world of conscience, kisses
your chosen forehead, and to complete this essay
whispers in the ear of your intelligence the words:
God is great.
13
Muhammad Husayn Na‘ini
Government in the Islamic Perspective
Muhammad Husayn Na'im (Iran, 1860-1936) was an Iranian religious scholar who lived
for decades at Shi'i seminary cities in Iraq, which was part of the Ottoman Empire until
1918, When the constitutional movement took power in Iran in 1906, Na'ini was the
assistant to one of the leading scholars of Najaf, whom he helped in arranging an influen¬
tial fatwa (religious ruling) issued in support of the constitutionalists, Three years later,
Na'ini expanded on this theme in a treatise defending constitutional limits on power in
Islamic terms—the introductory section of which is presented in this chapter, This trea¬
tise was widely distributed in Iran and provided theological support for the constitution¬
alists in the face of monarchist and dencal opposition. Na'ini later came to reject political
involvement, famously—though possibly apocryphally—urging that all copies of his trea¬
tise be thrown into the Tigris River. Na'ini even supported the rise of the Pahlavi dicta¬
torship in the 1920s. Yet his text survived long after its author's disavowal. Its biting criti¬
cism of both monarchical and clerical despotism has remained common knowledge among
educated Iranians and a thom in the side of successive dynasties in Iran, as well as the
Islamic Republic. 1
Thanks are due to God, Lord of the two worlds, and
salutations are due to the noblest of the earliest and
the latest and the seal of the prophets, Muhammad
and his pure progeny, and damnation is deserved for
all of their foes, until the Day of Judgment.
And then, those aware of the history of the world
have come to realize that prior to the Crusades, the
Christian nations and the Europeans were deprived
not only of all the varieties of natural sciences but
also of the sciences of civilization, practical reason,
and political axioms. This was due either to the lack
of such knowledge in their divine parchments or to
adulteration of their heavenly books. After that fate¬
ful event [the Crusades], those nations attributed
their defeat to their lack of access to civilizational
sciences and their general ignorance. Thus they con¬
sidered curing this mother of all ailments as the
greatest of their goals and pursued knowledge as a
lover who seeks after the beloved. So they appro¬
priated the principles of civilization and politics
Muhammad Husayn Na'ini, Tanbih al-umma wa tanzih al-
milla ya hukumat az nazar-i islam (Exhortation of the Faith¬
ful and Purification of the Nation, or Government from the
Perspective of Islam), 6th ed. (Tehran, Iran: Shirkat-i Sahami-
i Intishar, 1960). First published in 1909. Translation from
Persian and introduction by Mahmoud Sadri.
implicit in the Islamic holy books and traditions,
and in the edicts of ‘Ali [son-in-law and fourth suc¬
cessor of the Prophet] and other early leaders of
Islam, as they have justly acknowledged in their
earlier histories, as they have admitted that learn¬
ing such principles and sciences conducive to such
spectacular advances in such a short period of time
would be impossible for unaided human reason.
Therefore the progress and perseverance of the West
in translation, interpretation, and application of these
principles on the one hand, and the concomitant
regression of the people of Islam and their subju¬
gation at the hands of unbelievers [the Mongol con¬
querors] resulted in such a state that Muslims gradu¬
ally forgot the principles of their own historical
origins and even supposed that abject subordination
is a necessity of Islamic life. Therefore they thought
that the commandments of Islam are contrary to
civilization, reason, and justice—the fountainhead
of progress—and as such, they equated Islam with
slavery and savagery.
1. Abdul-Hadi Hairi. Shi‘ism and Constitutionalism in
Iran (Leiden, Netherlands: E. J. Brill. 1977); Baqir Parham.
“Nigahi bih nazariyyat-i Na'ini” (A Look at Na'ini's Theo¬
ries), Chishm-andaz (Perspective), number 5, 1988, pp. 48-
77; Tawfiq Sayf, Didda al-istibdad (Against Dictatorship)
(Beirut, Lebanon: al-Markaz al-thaqafi al-‘arabi, 1999).
GOVERNMENT IN THE ISLAMIC PERSPECTIVE
At this juncture in history, with God’s benevolent
support, the retrogressive trajectory of the Islamic
world has been halted and slavery under the imperi¬
ous passions of dictatorial rulers has been terminated
[the reference is to the Iranian Constitutional Revo¬
lution of 1906, and possibly also to the Ottoman
Young Turk Revolution of 1908], The Muslim com¬
munity has, thanks to the superb guidance and rea¬
soning of its clerical leaders, become aware of the
true requirements of its religion and its God-given
freedoms. Thus they have endeavored to free them¬
selves from the pharaohs of the time, and to restore
their legitimate national rights of partnership and
equality in all affairs. In their struggle to break the
chains of slavery and in claiming their legitimate
rights, Muslims have hazarded oceans of fire, from
which they have emerged as a phoenix. They have
faced martyrdom and spilled their pure blood in order
to achieve the great privilege of national salvation
and prosperity, and in this holy project they have
followed the utterance of the prince of the oppressed,
Husayn [grandson of the Prophet and third Imam of
Shi‘i Islam], who extolled “those who prefer noble
death to the abject life of servitude.”
The momentous edicts of the leaders of the
Ja'fari religion [Shi‘i Islam] in the city of Najaf, 2
and the subsequent edicts of the elders of Istanbul
[Sunni Islam] who unanimously declared the strug¬
gle for these holy and legitimate goals [of constitu¬
tionalism] as a necessity of religion, exonerated
Islam from acquiescing to such tyrannical and irra¬
tional rules. These were clear historical documents
concerning the position of the Islamic leadership on
the issue, thus silencing critical tongues. But the
man-eating pack of wolves in Iran attempted to
sustain the polluted tree of injustice, tyranny, and
the plunder of the lives and property of the Mus¬
lims. Finding no better pretext for this than religion,
they turned to the pharaonic declaration: “I fear for
you, for they may change your religion.” [Qur’an,
Sura 40, Verse 26]
Thus they allied themselves with the pharaoh of
Iran and revived the atrocities of Zahhak [a mythi¬
cal Iranian tyrant] and Genghis [Khan, Mongol ruler,
1206-1227], and called it religion. Absolute power
2. [The author is referring to the joint edicts of three grand
ayatullahs in Najaf, in today’s Iraq, declaring the Iranian
constitutional revolution to be in accordance with the spirit
of Islam.—Trans.]
I 17
belongs only to God, yet they declared it un-Islamic
to struggle against the absolute power of earthly ty¬
rants. They dared to contaminate this sublime reli¬
gion with such an insult; they dared to commit this
grave affront to the prophet of Islam, even in God’s
sovereign domain. This is the extent of their injus¬
tice, that they at once affronted the Creator and His
creation. Verily God spoke the truth in the holy
Qur’an: “Therefore evil was the end of those who did
evil, for they denied the signs of God and made fun
of them.” [Sura 30, Verse 10]
An authentic hadith [tradition of the Prophet]
states: “When apostasy prevails on earth it is incum¬
bent upon the knowledgeable to reveal their knowl¬
edge, and if they fail in doing so God’s damnation
will be upon them.” Accordingly, silence in the face
of such an outrage and derision of religion, and fail¬
ure to support the holy religion in repelling such a
mischief and injustice, is contrary to the duty, and
even abets the injustice. So this lowliest of servants
of the illustrious religion has taken it upon himself
to discharge his responsibility, to render this service,
and to reveal the incongruity of this apostasy with
the essential necessities of Islam. It is my hope that
with God’s blessed succor this offering will achieve
divine approbation, thus making it unnecessary for
others to undertake such a task. “And I have no suc¬
cess except in God. I have put all my confidence in
Him, I repent and take refuge in him. And he is the
ultimate guide toward righteousness.” 3
Since the aim of this essay is to admonish the
faithful concerning the necessities of the religion and
to cleanse the nation of the apostasy [of tyranny], I
have given it the title of “Exhortation of the Faithful
and Purification of the Nation.” I will organize it in
an introduction, five chapters, and a conclusion.
Introduction: An Analysis of the
Nature of Tyranny, Conditionality 4 of
the Government, Achieving a Constitution
and a Consultative Assembly of the People,
and an Explanation of the Meaning of
Liberty and Equality
3. [This phrase is in Arabic but is not quoted from the
Qur’an. Using such phrases in Persian texts is the equivalent
of using Latin phrases in English texts.—Trans.]
4. [The term “conditionality” ( mashrutiyat) also was used
to mean “constitutionalism.”—Trans.]
I 18 Muhammad Husayn Na‘ini
Be aware of the notion that all sages of Islam and of
the nations of the world agree that some form of
polity and government is necessary for the constitu¬
tion of the society and the life of humankind, whether
it be personal or group rule, legitimate or illegitimate
government, freely elected, hereditary, or dictatori-
ally imposed. Also, it is necessarily true that the
maintenance of the honor, independence, and nation¬
ality of every nation, be it in religious or national af¬
fairs, is contingent upon their own endeavors. Other¬
wise, their privileges, the honor of their religion,
the integrity of their country, and the independence
of their nation will be utterly destroyed, regardless
of how wealthy, progressive, and civilized they may
be. That is why the pure shari ‘a [religious law] of
Islam has designated the protection of the “essential
constitution” of Islam as the highest of duties, speci¬
fying Islamic government as a holy duty invested in
the institution of the imamate [Shi’i religious leader¬
ship]. (A detailed explication of this issue is out¬
side of the scope of this essay.) It is evident that all
worldly affairs are contingent upon government, and
that the protection of every nation’s honor and na¬
tionality is contingent upon self-rule, based upon two
basic principles:
1. Protection of domestic order, education of the
citizenry, ensuring that rights are allotted to the
rightful, and deterring people from invading oth¬
ers’ rights—these are among the internal duties
of government.
2. Protection of the nation from foreign invasion,
neutralizing the typical maneuvers in such cases,
providing for a defensive force, and so on—these
are what the experts in terminology call the “pro¬
tection of the essential constitution” of Islam.
The shari'a canons concerning the upholding of
these two holy duties are known as political and
civilizational laws and are considered as the second
subdivision of “practical reason.” 5 This is why the
greatest kings and emperors of Persia and Rome were
adamant in choosing competent sages in theoretical
and practical disciplines for the management of so¬
cietal affairs. These sages realized the necessity and
legitimacy of discharging such duties, and this real-
5. [As distinct from “theoretical reason,” in Islamic phi¬
losophy. The field of practical reason consists of three sub¬
divisions: purification of the soul, management of society or
politics, and home economics.—Trans.]
ization persuaded them to accept such responsibili¬
ties, despite their abhorrence of tyrannical rule. One
can even surmise that the reason for any government,
any system of taxation, any organization of forces in
society, whether initiated by divine prophets or by
sages, was to uphold these principles and discharge
such duties. The pure shari‘a too has endeavored to
remedy the shortcomings [of government] and to
stipulate its conditions and limitations.
The nature of the ruler’s domination, in terms of
the extent of the exclusiveness of its rule, can only
be conceived of as one of two kinds: It is either “pos¬
sessive” or “preservative.”
The possessive form of government is the case
in which a prince considers the nation his personal
property to dispose of as his whims and desires dic¬
tate. He treats the nation like a stable full of animals
meant to satisfy his passions and wishes. He rewards
or punishes people insofar as they aid or impede him
in realizing his ends. He does not hesitate to im¬
prison, banish, torture, or execute his opponents,
tear them to pieces, and feed them to his hounds.
Or to encourage his pack of wolves to spill their
blood and plunder their property. He can separate
any proprietor from his property, and give it to his
entourage. He upholds or tramples people’s rights
as he sees fit. He considers himself the sole pos¬
sessor of the right to expropriate any holdings, to
sell, rent, or give away any part of the nation or its
rights, or to exact any taxes for his personal private
use. His attempt to maintain order and to defend the
nation is like that of a farmer toward his farm. If he
wishes, he keeps it. If not, he gives it away to the
obsequious bunch around him. On the slightest sug¬
gestion, he sells and mortgages national rights to
finance his silly and hedonistic trips abroad. 6 He
doesn’t even hesitate to give himself leave for open
sexual debauchery at the expense of his subjects,
and still, he adorns himself with divine titles wor¬
thy of God. His courtiers help him identify his pow¬
ers of tyranny, domination, passion, and anger with
those of the nation. They help him to arrogate to
himself God’s attribute: “He cannot be questioned
about what He does, but they will be questioned.”
[Qur’an, Sura 21, Verse 23]
6. [This jab is meant particularly for the late nineteenth
and early twentieth century shahs who sold exorbitant con¬
cessions to foreign corporations in order to finance lavish
personal trips to Europe.—Trans.]
GOVERNMENT IN THE ISLAMIC PERSPECTIVE
This form of government, because it is autocratic
and arbitrary, is known as possessive, tyrannical,
enslaving, imperious, and dictatorial. It is clear why
each of these titles would be appropriate for such a
form of government. The head of such a form of
government is known as an absolute ruler, “owner
of the yokes,” dictator, and so on. The nation that is
subject to such rule should be called servile, down¬
trodden, and oppressed. And insofar as they are alien¬
ated from their own resources and wealth, like little
orphans, they may be called “children” as well. And
insofar as their use for their rulers is like the use of
crops for the farmer, they may be called “vegetative”!
The degrees of dictatorship exerted by this form of
government varies according to the personal at¬
tributes and rational faculties of the princes and their
courtiers, as well as the degree of the awareness of
nations of their rights and the rights of their rulers,
and the degree of their devotion to monotheistic or
polytheistic religions. (For this affects the leave they
give to their rulers to lord over them as the sole arbi¬
ter and proprietor of their rights.) The most extreme
form of tyranny is where the ruler declares himself
God. Its power will be limited to the extent to which
those subject to such a rule resist it. The rule is ab¬
solute if the citizens acquiesce to it, as happened
under the rule of the pharaohs. And according to the
old adage: “People follow the religion of their
princes.” They in turn treat their subordinates as petty
tyrants. The root of this sprawling, degenerate tree
is none but the nation’s ignorance of its own rights
and the rights of its rulers, and a general lack of re¬
sponsibility, accountability, watchful deliberation,
and checks and balances.
The second form of government is that in which
rule does not belong to an absolute arbiter. Govern¬
ment is based on discharging the aforementioned
legitimate responsibilities. It is a limited form of
government, and the ruler’s authority is rule-bound
and conditional to the same extent.
These two forms of government are distinct both
in their true nature and in their effects. Because the
former is, in all its manifestations, based on domi¬
nation and possession, the nation is hostage to the
whims of the leaders. National resources are at the
mercy of the ruling group. They are not responsible
to anyone for what they do, so whatever they refrain
from doing deserves profuse thanks. If they killed
someone but didn’t mutilate him and feed him to their
hounds, they should be thanked. If they expropriated
I 19
property but didn’t rape the women, they should be
thanked. Everyone’s relationship with the ruler is that
of a slave to his master—even lower than that! It is
the relationship of the farm animal to the farmer. It
is even lower than that: it is the relation of the crop
to the crop owner. Their only value is to sate the
needs of their owner. They have no independent right
to their own life and existence. In short, this relation¬
ship is like the relationship of creation to the Creator.
On the other hand, the nature and essence of the lat¬
ter form of government are stewardship, service,
upholding domestic order, and protecting the nation.
This form of government is committed to using the
nation’s resources to meet the nation’s needs, not to
satiate the passions of the rulers. Therefore, the au¬
thority of the government is limited to the above-
mentioned matters, and its interference in its citizen’s
affairs is conditional upon the necessity of reaching
those [national] goals. The citizens are partners with
government in the ownership of the nation’s powers
and resources. Everyone has equal rights, and the
administrators are all stewards, not owners. They are
responsible to the nation, and the slightest infraction
is punishable by law. And all citizens share the na¬
tional right to question the authorities safely, and are
safe in doing so. Nor does anyone protesting the
government bear the yoke of servitude of the sover¬
eign prince or his courtiers. This kind of government
is called limited, just, conditional, responsible, and
delegated. And it is evident why each of these des¬
ignations would be appropriate for such a form of
government. Those in charge of such a government
are called protectors, guardians, just arbiters, and
responsible and just rulers. The nation that is blessed
by such a government is called pious, emancipated,
gallant, and alive. (And again, it is evident why each
of these designations apply to such a nation.) The
nature of this government is analogous to loaning and
delegating, and it can survive only in the absence of
usurpation and violations of trust. That which pro¬
tects this form of government and prevents it from
degenerating into an absolute and arbitrary rule is
none other than the principle of accountability, vigi¬
lance, and responsibility.
The most exalted means of ensuring that a gov¬
ernment will not betray the trust of the nation in any
way, is, of course, having infallible rulers. This is the
same principle that we Shi‘is consider as a principle
of our religion. It is necessarily evident that anyone
who partakes of the exalted status of an infallible
120 Muhammad Husayn Na‘ini
leader will be innocent of base passions, blessed with
wisdom, and endowed with many moral attributes
(whose explanation falls beyond the scope of this
essay). Due to divine protection, such a leader is
immune even to the slightest oversight and neglect.
In short, this is a status “whose true nature is incom¬
prehensible for ordinary human beings.”
However, given a lack of access to such divine
leaders, 7 seldom does it happen that the king is just
and virtuous and happens to choose a perfectly wise
and chaste supervisor of the affairs of the state, as
happened in the case of Nushirvan [Khosrow, king
of Iran, reigned 531-579] and [his vizier] Buzar-
jumihr a long time ago. The level of vigilance, ac¬
countability, and responsibility and the partnership,
equality, and honesty of the people and the govern¬
ment achieved under Nushirvan’s rule was an excep¬
tion, not a rule, in history. It is indeed rarer than the
rarest of jewels. It is impossible to expect it to hap¬
pen with frequency in history. Thus in the absence
of divine leadership and the exceedingly rare inci¬
dents of just kingship, nations may attempt a pale
likeness of such a rule only under two conditions:
First, by imposing the aforementioned limits so
that the government will strictly refrain from inter¬
fering in affairs in which it has no right to interfere.
Under these conditions, governmental powers are
stipulated in degree and kind, and the freedoms and
rights of all classes of the people are formally guar¬
anteed, in accordance to the requirements of religion.
Violating the trust of the nation on either side and in
any form, whether by excess or penury, is punish¬
able by permanent termination of the service and
other penal measures applicable to betrayal of trust.
Since the written document concerning political and
civil affairs of the nation is analogous to “practical
treatises” [compendia of ritual duties issued by a re¬
ligious scholar], in that it sets limits and the penalty
for exceeding them, such a document is called the
constitutional law or the constitution. There should
be no doubt about its universal application, with no
conditions, except in areas of conflict with religious
laws. Other considerations concerning this issue, and
the points that must be observed in order to maintain
the integrity of the constitution will be mentioned
later, God willing.
7. [The last of the infallible Imams, according to Shi‘i
theology, went into occultation in 874.—Trans.]
Second, strengthening the principle of vigilance,
accountability, and complete responsibility by ap¬
pointing a supervisory assembly of the wise, the well-
wishers of the nation, and the experts in internal and
external affairs, so they can discharge their duties in
preventing violation and wrongdoing. The people’s
representatives are comprised of such individuals and
their formal seat is called “the Assembly of National
Consultation.” True accountability and responsibil¬
ity will preserve the limits on power and prevent the
return of possessive government only if the execu¬
tive branch is under the supervision of the legisla¬
tive branch, and the legislative branch is responsible
to every individual in the nation. Slackening either
of these two responsibilities will lead to the deterio¬
ration of the limits on power and reversion of con¬
stitutional government to absolutism in the first
case, and to oligarchic autocracy of the legislature
in the second. The legitimacy of the supervision of
the elected legislative assembly rests conclusively on
the will of the nation’s selection, according to the
principles of Sunni Islam, which relies on the con¬
tractual powers of the umma [the Muslim commu¬
nity]. But according to Shi‘i Islam, this legitimacy
rests in the principle of the supervision of the “the
public representatives” of the Hidden Imam during
his occultation. 8 Thus the legislature should either in¬
clude some of the experts in religious law or be com¬
prised of people who are given leave by such person¬
ages to adjudicate on their behalf. The correction and
confirmation of the representative assembly’s deci¬
sions by the grand experts in religious law will suf¬
fice, as we shall, God willing, explain later.
From what we have explained so far it is clear that
the foundation of the first form of government [tyr¬
anny] is absolute power, possession of the nation,
inequality of the citizens with the government, and
irresponsibility of the leaders. And all of these stem
from a disregard of the above two principles. All of
the devastation and atrocities in Iran; all that has
ruined religion, government, and the nation in that
land, knowing no limits, is of this sort. “There is no
need for explanation after exhibition!”
The foundation of the second [constitutional]
form of government, as you have learned, is limited
8. [In Shi ‘i Islam, the Hidden Imam had “specific repre¬
sentatives” for the first seventy years of his occultation. Since
that time, those knowledgeable in religion serve as his "pub¬
lic representatives.”—Trans.]
GOVERNMENT IN THE ISLAMIC PERSPECTIVE
121
to delegation in affairs beneficial to the nation. Con¬
trary to the first form, this government is based on
partnership, liberty, and rights, including the right to
financial accountability and supervision of adminis¬
trators. All these, as well, are the results of the ap¬
plication of the above two principles. 9 These two
principles and their corollaries were constituted by
the founder of the religion. So long as they were pro¬
tected, and Islamic government did not degenerate
from the second to the first form, the pace of the
expansion of Islam was mind-boggling. After
Mu’awiyya [reigned 661-680] and the children of
al-‘As came to power, and all the principles and cor¬
ollaries of Islamic government were transformed into
their diametrical opposites, the situation changed.
Still, so long as other nations too were enslaved in
tyrannies of their own, nothing much changed, and
Islam continued to enjoy a measure of stability de¬
spite its tyrannical leaders. However, as soon as the
other nations realized the natural foundations of pro¬
gressive government, it was inevitable that they
would prosper and that the Islamic nation would
become their inferiors and, worse, be returned to the
pre-Islamic savagery and ignorance, like animals,
even plants, in the degree of their servitude. “Ver¬
ily, God does not change the state of a people til they
change themselves.” [Qur’an, Sura 13, Verse 11]
At any rate, since the basis of the former is
thralldom and of the latter liberty, the text of the holy
Qur’an and traditions of the holy infallible ones have
on several occasions likened the servitude of the ty¬
rants to idolatry, the opposite of liberty. They have
guided Muslims to free their necks from the yoke of
wretchedness.
For example, the Qur’an tells that the Pharaoh
ruled over the children of Israel, although they did
not worship him as the Egyptians did, and were tor¬
mented and imprisoned in Egypt and prevented
from leaving for the holy land. In one verse [Sura 26,
Verse 22] Moses, may peace be upon him, tells the
9. In the first days of Islam, these two principles were
applied so completely that the second caliph [‘Umar ibn al-
Khaltab, 634-644] was publically rebuked for wearing an ex¬
tra garment, when everyone had received only one garment.
He had to send for his son 'Abdullah to testify that his father’s
second garment was his, and that he had willingly given it to
his father. On another occasion, when he asked to be corrected
if he erred, he was reminded by his audience that he could be
straightened by the sword if he diverged from the straight path.
Pharaoh, “You consider me indebted to your hos¬
pitality even though you have enslaved the Israel¬
ites?” In another blessed verse [Sura 23, Verse 47]
the Pharaoh says, “whose people are our slaves.” In
still another verse [Sura 7, Verse 127] he says, “and
we shall subjugate them.” It is evident that the sla¬
very of the Israelites is an expression of this subju¬
gation. The noblest of all, the Prophet of Islam,
greetings be to him and his pure progeny, has stated
in the authentic and frequently quoted tradition:
“When the children of al-‘As reach 30 in number,
they shall turn the religion of God upside down and
take the servants of God as their own servants.”
[Hadith scholar Fakhr al-Din Turayhi, circa 1571-
1674,] the author of Majma' al-Bahrain [The
Bahrain Collection], interpreted the word “servant”
as “slave.” Similarly, [Muhammad ibn Ya’qub Firuza-
badi, circa 1329-1414,] the author of Qamus [The
Concordance], generalized the meaning of the word
“servant” in this context to “serfs” and “subordi¬
nates.” This generalization is further confirmed in
the blessed verse [Sura 6, Verse 94]: “you have left
behind your servants [upon death].” The prescient
hadith of the Prophet of Islam concludes that once
the number of the fruits of the evil tree of tyranny
reach 30, they will alter God’s religion and take
people as slaves. The Prophet designated this num¬
ber of wrongdoers as a critical threshold at which
they would begin to transform the form of Islamic
government from stewardship to tyrannical posses¬
sion. ‘Ali, the commander of the faithful, to whom
is due the highest of prayers and salutations, elabo¬
rated on the sufferings of the children of Israel at
the hands of the Pharaoh and his people in a ser¬
mon: “the pharaohs took them as slaves.” He then
expounded on the meaning of slavery: “then they
subjected them to the worst tortures and made them
drink the poisonous cup drop by drop. They con¬
tinued to languish in this state of abject ruin and de¬
feated subjugation. They couldn’t find any way to
refuse or defend themselves.” In the same sermon
‘Ali explained the reign of the leaders of Iran and
Rome over the children of Israel and Isma’il [the
Arabs]. Although in these cases the domination was
not connected to deification of the kings, as was the
case in Egypt, nonetheless ’Ali treated it similarly:
“In those days, kings of Iran and Rome were their
masters, banishing them from the lush arable lands
around the Sea of Iraq toward arid areas of the in¬
land.” In another sermon, after a few complaints of
122 Muhammad Husayn Na‘ini
his blessed heart concerning the hypocrisy and re¬
bellion of the inhabitants of Iraq, in which he
warned them that as a result of this behavior they
will be deprived of his leadership and become slaves
of Umayyad rule [661-750], he said: “And they will
find the Umayyads evil masters after me.” ‘ Ali used
the word “master” instead of “steward” here. This
is in agreement with scores of other traditions con¬
cerning the conversion of the form of government
in early Islam. The prince of the oppressed, [‘Ali’s
younger son] Husayn, equated obedience to the
Umayyad leaders with abject slavery. In reply to the
coarse and rude bunch of Kufans who had declared,
“We have descended upon you by order of your
cousin,” he replied: “I shall not give you my hand
of allegiance as an inferior, nor shall I confess my
allegiance to you as a slave. You have limited my
options to two: death and servitude. And far be it
from us to accept servitude. God has forbidden it
to us, and to His Messenger, and to the faithful, and
to the pure of heart, and to the proud souls, and to
all those who prefer noble death to a life of servi¬
tude.” He echoed his father’s words: “How can a
head bent before God be made to bend to any
other?” Thus Husayn refused to acquiesce. In order
to preserve his freedom and monotheism, he offered
up his life, his property, and his family. He made
this generous sacrifice for the liberation of the com¬
munity of the faithful, to cleanse its body of the
impurities of hedonistic passions. This is why all
others in the history of Islam who have followed
Husayn’s blessed precedent, who have made simi¬
lar sacrifices, are called “resisters of injustice” and
“heroes of freedom.” Truly, they are all grain pick¬
ers of this abundant harvest and dew drinkers of this
vast ocean of resistance and freedom-seeking.
Husayn, peace be upon him and all those who
were martyred with him, addressed Hurr ibn Yazid
Riyahi [a Kufan military officer], after Hurr had de¬
fected from the enemy and stood [with Husayn],
ready to be martyred in his blessed stirrups: “You are
the free one, Hurr, as your mother named you [Hurr
means “free”]. You shall live as a free and heroic
soul, in this world as well as the next.” Likewise, the
verse [Sura 24, Verse 55] declares: “God has prom¬
ised to make those of you who believe and do right,
leaders in the land, as He had made those before
them, and will establish their faith which He has
chosen for them, and change their fear into security.
They will worship Me and not associate any one with
Me. But those who disbelieve after this will be rep¬
robates.” This verse as well as the closing clauses of
the “Promulgation” prayer [a prominent piece of the
Shi‘i liturgy] refer to the return of his holiness the
twelfth Imam, the awaited Messiah—may our lives
be sacrificed for him. The acquiescence of the umma
to tyrants is likened here to polytheism. As Husayn
himself stated, “I hold no allegiance to any tyrant of
my time.” Also, interpretations of the blessed verse,
“They consider their rabbis and monks as lords,”
[Sura 9, Verse 31 ] hold that the verse refers to [Jews’
and Christians’] unquestioning obedience toward
popes and their courtiers. Taqlid [imitation] of reli¬
gious leaders who pretend to present true religion is
no different from obedience to political tyrants. Ei¬
ther one is a form of idolatry. The above verse that
rebukes imitation of the ill-intentioned clergy and
ambitious and hedonist hypocrites, also leads us to
the same conclusion. The difference between the two
forms of obedience is that political tyranny is based
on naked force, while religious tyranny is based on
deviousness and chicanery. The difference leads us
to believe that, in truth, the former is based on the
control of bodies while the latter stems from the con¬
trol of hearts.
This argument confirms the astuteness and accu¬
racy of the argument of some of the experts of this
science who divide tyranny into political and reli¬
gious kinds. They consider them as interrelated and
mutually protective of each other! It is also evident
that uprooting this evil tree and liberation from this
abject slavery—possible only through the heedful¬
ness and awakening of the nation—is relatively easy
in the case of political tyranny and extremely diffi¬
cult in the case of religious tyranny, thus complicat¬
ing resistance to the former form of tyranny as well.
The dismal condition of us Iranians is living tes¬
timony to the mutual support of these two forms of
tyranny and slavery. The two are allied and mutually
confederated. Thus the difficulty of getting rid of
political tyranny is rooted in religious tyranny’s sup¬
port of the political order. This will be, God willing,
further explicated in the discussion of the methods
of resisting the forces of absolutism.
We can conclude that obedience to the autocratic
orders of the rebellious tyrants of the umma and the
bandits of the nation is not only an injustice to one’s
own life and liberty, which are among the greatest
endowments granted by God, holy be His names, to
human beings. In addition, according to the explicit
GOVERNMENT IN THE ISLAMIC PERSPECTIVE
123
text of the worthy Qur'an and the traditions of the
infallible ones, it is tantamount to idolatry, taking
associates with God, for God only deserves the at¬
tributes of ultimate possession of the creation, and
unquestionable authority in whatever He deems nec¬
essary. He alone can be free of responsibility in what
He does. All of these are among His holy attributes.
He who arrogates these attributes for himself and
usurps this status is not only a tyrant and a usurper
of the station of stewardship, but also, according to
holy texts, a pretender to the divine mantle and a
transgressor to His inviolate realm. Conversely, lib¬
eration from such an abject servitude not only re¬
leases the soul from its vegetative state and animal
status into the realm of noble humanity; it also brings
one closer to monotheism and the worship of God
and His true and exclusive names and attributes. That
is why liberating the imprisoned and usurped nations
from the yoke of slavery and abject servitude and
leading them to their God-given rights and liberties
has been among the most significant goals of the
prophets, peace be upon them.
Moses and his brother Aaron, peace be upon them
and upon our Prophet, according to the text of the
holy Qur’an, [Sura 20, Verse 47] addressed the Pha¬
raoh thus: “So let the Israelites come with us and do
not oppress them.” All they sought was to liberate
the Israelites from slavery and torture, and take them
to the holy land. They even guaranteed Pharaoh’s
continued reign and authority in his own land (as has
been emphasized in [’Ali’s] holy “sermon of dispar¬
agement” [of the devil]). Pharaoh’s refusal and his
persecution of the Israelites led to the drowning of
the Pharaoh and his troops and the liberation of the
Israelites. In his holy “sermon of disparagement,”
‘Ali, greetings to him, after the statements we have
quoted above, argued that one of the advantages of
the mission of the Prophet, peace be upon him, was
liberation from the yokes [of the kings of Iran and
Rome].
From the Prophet’s biography, one recognizes the
equality of a nation’s people with their leaders in all
laws and obligations and the great efforts of the
Prophet, God’s greetings be upon him, to establish
this principle, thus guaranteeing the well-being of the
umma.
Let us cite an example for each case. First, the
principle of equality in property is evident in the inci¬
dent in which [Muhammad's step-]daughter Zaynab
[died 629] came to Medina and offered an heirloom
in order to purchase the freedom of her husband,
Abu’l-‘Asi [ibn al-Rabi‘, a non-Muslim who had
been captured by the Muslims in battle]. When she
approached with the heirloom, an ornament that she
had inherited from her mother Khadija [the Prophet’s
wife, died 619], may peace be upon her, the Prophet
wept and announced that he would free her husband
without payment. Yet he was careful to ask whether
all the Muslims would forego their share of the pay¬
ment before he returned the heirloom [to Zaynab],
Second, the principle of equality in decrees is evi¬
dent in the case in which [the Prophet] did not dis¬
criminate between his uncle ‘Abbas [ibn ‘Abd al-
Muttalib, died 652], his cousin ‘Aqil [ibn Abi Talib,
died circa 670], and other prisoners of war, when they
were brought in front of him. They were given no
special privileges, even in the binding of their hands
and arms. Third, the principle of equality in punish¬
ment is evident in [the Prophet’s] last sermon, when
he asked all the faithful to exercise their right of just
retribution if he has unfairly injured any of them.
Someone claimed that [the Prophet’s] riding crop had
accidentally touched his shoulder during of the cam¬
paigns. The Prophet of Islam bared his shoulder and
asked the man to retaliate if he wished. But the man
was satisfied to kiss [the Prophet’s] shoulder. Also,
the Prophet once said in public that if my only daugh¬
ter Fatima ever commits a crime, her punishment
would not differ in the slightest from the punishment
of any other wrong-doer.
It was for the revival of such a blessed tradition
of leadership, and in order to abrogate the apostasy
of discrimination in the distribution of favors, and to
reverse the endowment of fiefs, and to uphold the
principle of equality, that the commander of the faith¬
ful ‘Ali encountered so many enmities and distur¬
bances during his rule. Even senior disciples, such
as ‘Abdullah [Ibn] ‘Abbas [an early Islamic scholar,
619-686] and Malik Ashtar [a great warrior, died
658] and the others, had been used to the practice of
giving and accepting favors and discriminating based
on the closeness of association [with the Prophet].
They preferred earlier Muslims such as the “Emi¬
grants” [who accompanied Muhammad to Medina in
622] and the warriors of the battle of Badr [in 624]
over later Muslims and newly converted Muslims
like Iranians. So they would ask for favors [from ‘Ali]
and would, in every case, hear harsh rebukes. The
story of ‘Ali’s refusal to provide for his needy brother
from the treasury, his sharp rebuke of one of his
124 Muhammad Husayn Na‘ini
daughters who wanted to borrow a necklace from the
treasury for one night, and his refusal to allow his
own son to borrow some honey from the public
stock—which made even his enemy, Mu'awiyya
[who would soon found the Umayyad dynasty] weep
and extol his virtue as a leader—and countless other
similar stories are examples of the justice and equal¬
ity in Islam that put all other proponents of these
virtues to shame.
All these endeavors served to preserve this cen¬
tral pillar of Islam and discharge the great responsi¬
bility of leadership in Islam. It was with a similar
motivation, and in order to follow the glorious ex¬
ample of the praiseworthy prophets and their trusted
stewards, that the godly jurisconsults and leaders of
the Ja'fari [Shi‘i] religion have resolved to free the
faithful from the servitude of the tyrants in this aus¬
picious age—which is, with God’s help, the age in
which the enslavement and decline of the Muslims
are being terminated. They have resolved as well that
in accordance with the maxim, “He who can’t accom¬
plish all should not abandon all,” they ought to con¬
vert the form of government from possessive back
to delegative. While the possessive form has caused
the ruin of Islamic societies and the decline of Islamic
states, the delegative form will protect against most
forms of corruption and prevent the dominion of the
infidels over the country. In this path [the religious
leaders] have engaged in a struggle needed to pro¬
tect the essence of Islam. Recognition of the need for
change, and the brave, sober, and earnest attempt to
bring about the end of absolutism and to replace it
with limited government, has clearly sparked a back¬
lash. The religious form of absolutism, in conformity
with its ancient and ongoing duty to protect the evil
tree of tyranny in the name of protecting religion, did
its best to describe the life-sustaining principles of
limited and responsible government in the most gro¬
tesque and reprehensible disguises—contrary to the
Qur’an’s warning: “Do not mix the false with the
true, and hide the truth knowingly.” [Sura 2, Verse
42] It portrayed the liberation of the nation from the
clutches of unjust tyrants as illusory. (The reader of
this essay knows such liberation to be the goal of all
prophets and their just successors, and the origin of
Islamic government, which was distorted by the evil
tree of autocracy planted by the family of al-‘As.) The
proponents of religious despotism went farther and
declared this struggle a denial of all moral limits and
an attempt to spread apostasy. They even attributed
the outward appearance of women in the West (al¬
lowed by Christianity in places such as Russia,
France, or Britain) to the political change from ab¬
solutism to constitutionalism, though this is as irrele¬
vant to constitutional government as could be. Fur¬
ther, they mischaracterized the principle of equality
of rights and powers, which the reader has learned
from this essay to have been the practice of the
Prophet of Islam and his just successors, for which
‘Ali was martyred, as was his son Husayn. They said
that this principle will erase all differences between
Muslims and non-Muslims in affairs such as inheri¬
tance, marriage, even penal law; and that it denies
any difference between children and adults, sane and
insane, healthy and sick, the free and coerced, the
able and the disabled, and so forth, in terms of their
rights and duties. All of these issues, which are far¬
ther from the quest for constitutionalism than the sky
is from the earth, they attached to the essence of this
noble endeavor.
Because the salvation and prosperity of the nation,
and the preservation of its essential rights, is contin¬
gent upon the limitation and responsibility of the
government, they have mobilized to cloak this divine
beneficence with ugliness. They do not realize that
the sun cannot be covered over with mud, nor the Nile
delta dammed with shovels. The Iranian nation—no
matter how ignorant of the requirements of religion
it is imagined to be, regardless of how unaware it may
be of the evils of slavery and the advantages of lib¬
erty and equality—at least understands this much: Its
sages and brave compatriots—be they clergymen,
heroes, businessmen—would not have risen in order
to achieve that which the proponents of religious
despotism attribute to constitutionalism, but to attain
freedom and equality. The leaders of the Ja’fari reli¬
gion, too, had no motivation in authenticating this
movement with such explicit edicts and orders, and
in calling its enemies the enemies of the Imam of the
age [the Hidden Imam], except to protect the essence
of Islam and the integrity of the Islamic countries.
This bunch of tyrants and oppressors of the urnrna,
these depreciators of the shari'a, know full well that
spreading corruption, anarchy, and debauchery can
only strengthen the position of irresponsible, abso¬
lutist autocrats. They have no other objective in mind
but to help their masters by committing these heinous
acts. They know very well what we mean when we
say that these so-called clerics “do more harm to the
downtrodden Shi‘is than the cursed troops of Yazid
GOVERNMENT IN THE ISLAMIC PERSPECTIVE
125
[circa 642-683] did to Husayn, peace be upon him”!
They know how much we are hurt by their alliance
with tyrants. They recognize that the blessed verse of
the Qur'an [Sura 3, Verse 187] speaks of them: “And
remember when God took a promise from the people
of the Book, to make it known to humankind, and
not keep back any part of it, they set aside [the
pledge] and sold it away for a little gain; but how
wretched the bargain that they made.” They must
realize that in this world and in the Hereafter, noth¬
ing but scandal and damnation will result from their
support of tyranny. This is God’s unchanging tradi¬
tion, as stated in the Qur’an: “Such was God’s tradi¬
tion among those before you, and you will not find
any change in God’s tradition.” [Sura 33, Verse 62 ]
It is time to rein in our pen, to describe this scan¬
dal no further, for it is sure to affect its own kind [that
is, even proconstitutional clergy will suffer]. We shall
postpone revealing their fallacies to appropriate sec¬
tions in our five chapters. We shall bring the intro¬
duction to an end at this juncture with the following
summary of the five ensuing chapters:
First: The foundation of government in the reli¬
gion of Islam and in other religions, as well as in the
cogitations of nonreligious philosophers, the sages
of yore and thinkers of today, is none other than the
second [constitutional] form. Devolution to the
former [absolutist] form is among the apostasies of
tyrannical rebels of all times and periods of history.
Second: During this period of the occultation [of
the Hidden Imam], the umma is deprived of divine
stewardship and [the Imam’s] public representatives,
whose rule has been usurped [by mortals]. Should
one allow the former form of government to domi¬
nate—that is, compounded injustice, and usurpation
upon usurpation—or is it incumbent upon Muslims
to reduce the degree of injustice and usurpation?
Third: Based on the above-mentioned necessity
to limit [the powers of] government, can one argue
that the present form of constitutional government—
based on the two principles of limitation of powers
and responsibility of government—is the right an¬
swer and free of further limitations?
Fourth: Discussion and dispelling of some of the
temptations and fallacies adduced against constitu¬
tional government.
Fifth: Explication of the conditions for the cor¬
rectness and legitimacy of the process of electing
the nation’s representatives, and a summary of their
responsibilities.
14
Mahmud Tarzi
What Is to Be Done?
Mahmud Tarzi (Afghanistan, 1865-1933) was Afghanistan's foremost proponent of mod¬
ernization and reform within an Islamic context, after Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (chap¬
ter I I), whose birthplace is claimed by both Afghanistan and Iran. The son of a famed poet
whose outspokenness led the family into exile, Tarzi spent more than 20 years in the Ot¬
toman Empire, mostly in Damascus. Tarzi studied with Afghani for seven months in Istanbul,
and also had intellectual contact with reformers in the Levant, Central Asia, and India. He
returned to Afghanistan in 1905, opened a translation office, taught history and geography
at a military school, and assumed editorship of Siraj al-akhbar (The Lamp of the News), the
bimonthly periodical that became the cornerstone of modem Afghan journalism. He used
this publication as a forum to spread his message of modernization, nationalism, and iden¬
tity-—Afghan, Eastern, and Islamic—among the elite of Afghanistan and neighboring Mus¬
lim states. Because of his break from ornate literary styles, Tarzi is sometimes referred to as
the father of modem prose in Afghanistan. The specimen of Tarzi's work presented here
is drawn from a book presented to subscribers of Siraj al-akhbar in September 1912. Tarzi's
account of Afghan history is sketchy and not always factual, reflecting the version that en¬
joyed state sponsorship at the time. It is likely that Tarzi was one of the main architects of
this version, just as Tarzi's model for education policy was later adopted by the state, form¬
ing the foundation of modem education in Afghanistan.
The reign of the Great Amir [Dust Muhammad Khan,
reigned 1826-1839, 1842-1863] passed in tranquil¬
ity and total affluence. Great efforts were exerted
for internal reform. All dependencies became at¬
tached to the central administration of Kabul, mak¬
ing Afghanistan a strong state with many dependen¬
cies. No thought, however, was given to foreign
policy. Neither was anything done in the area of
public education.
After the death of the Great Amir, once again the
plague of disunity afflicted his sons and a destruc¬
tive civil war inflamed the dynasty. Chaos and blood¬
shed ravaged the country. It was at this time that
Baluchistan, Shalkut, the Diras, Peshawar, and other
territories were lost.
Mahmud Tarzi, Chih Bayad Kard? (What Is to Be Done?)
(Kabul, Afghanistan: Siraj al-Akhbar, 1912), pp. 119-159.
Translation from Dari and introduction by Helena Malikyar.
I. Vartan Gregorian, The Emergence of Modern Afghani¬
stan: Politics of Reform and Modernization, 1880-1946
(Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1969); Sobir
Mirzoev, Literaturno-prosvetiteVskaia Deiatel’nost' Makh-
muda Tarzi i Ego Gazeta Siradzh-ul’-Akhbar, 1911-1919
(The Literary and Educational Activity of Mahmud Tarzi
and his Newspaper, The Lamp of the News, 1911-1919)
We must say that there were two main reasons for
such a civil war and fratricide. One was the practice
of marrying a multitude of wives. 2 We do not call it
polygamy, as the latter term signifies the number set
by the shari'a [Islamic law] of four wives that can
only be allowed under specified conditions. By con¬
trast, a multitude of wives means twenty, thirty, or
forty wives, from each of whom would be born at
least one child, good or wicked! The rival wives
would instill discord in their children from their early
days. Rivalries and antagonism among the nannies,
the male attendants, and the nurses would also rein¬
force the discord. Second, there was a lack of proper
(Dushanbe, Tajikistan: Izd-vo “Won,” 1973); Ashraf Ghani,
“Literature as Politics: The Case of Mahmud Tarzi,” Afghani¬
stan, volume 29, number 3, 1976, pp. 63-72; May Schinasi,
Afghanistan at the Beginning of the Twentieth Century: Na¬
tionalism and Journalism in Afghanistan, A Study of Seraj
ul-akhbar ( 1911-1918 ) (Naples, Italy: Istituto LIniversitario
Orientale, 1979); 'Abd al-Bashir Shur, Mahmud Tarzi-yi
Afghani (Mahmud Tarzi the Afghan) (Kabul. Afghanistan:
Nasharat-i Ittihadiyya-i Zhumalistan, 1988).
2. [Tarzi’s sponsor, Amir Habibullah Khan, also had a
multitude of wives and concubines in his harem.—Trans.]
126
WHAT IS TO BE DONE?
127
education and discipline for the princes. From their
birth, they would be addressed with royal titles and
would spend their days playing games and seeking
pleasure. Their scientific education would, generally
speaking, remain limited to reading books in Persian
and writing decrees and orders. They would be un¬
aware of news from the outside world. Such innate
ignorance and lack of education was so prevalent that
no one could escape from its effects.
In the end, it was Amir Shir ‘Ali Khan [reigned
1863-1865, 1869-1879] who captured the throne of
Afghanistan, and once more the entire country was
unified under one central command. He raised an
army of about sixty to seventy thousand soldiers, who
received modem military training. He also brought
a number of reforms in the civil administration. In
the end, however, Amir Shir ‘Ali Khan made a po¬
litical error in that he was deceived by the con¬
spiracy of the Russian state and declared war on the
English state. Consequently, he was defeated, fled to
Turkistan, and died in Mazar-i Sharif. His son, Amir
Muhammad Ya‘qub Khan [reigned 1879-1880], who
had been imprisoned by his father for many years,
was released and, at such a sensitive time, ascended
the throne. His unbalanced state of mind after a long
imprisonment, added to the ill intentions of some
royal advisors and an incompetent entourage, re¬
sulted in the new amir signing a most damaging and
pernicious agreement with the English. This agree¬
ment resulted in the killing of [British official Louis]
Cavagnari [in 1879] and the imprisonment and sub¬
sequent exile to India of the amir himself. The En¬
glish occupied Afghanistan for the second time. The
famous General [Frederick] Roberts [1832-1914],
under the pretext of avenging Cavagnari, set up gal¬
lows in Kabul and began ordering the deaths of five,
ten, or twenty innocent Afghans on a daily basis. A
number of treacherous people, because of ignorance,
lack of education, and ignorance of patriotism and
religiosity, sold out their faith in religion for the vile
carcass of worldly gains and committed all sorts of
contemptible indecencies. Their names forever will
be mentioned with damnation in the pages of Afghan
history.
Most inhabitants, though, rose against the English.
Mullas [religious scholars] everywhere declared jihad
[holy struggle]. Women, men, old and young, anyone
who could hold a weapon marched to the battlefield.
The chaos of an uprising began to challenge the En¬
glish. Their army was besieged at Shirpur, the garri¬
son that the late Amir Shir ‘Ali Khan had built as an
excellent stronghold for the national army of Afghani¬
stan. In Qandahar too, the English army was sur¬
rounded. The misery and destruction that had previ¬
ously befallen the English was threatening them again,
but this time in manifold. At this precise moment the
news also struck like thunder that his late majesty Amir
‘Abd al-Rahman Khan [reigned 1880-1901] had
crossed the Amu River [from his exile in Central Asia].
If the Afghan nation could bring such calamity on the
English without having a king or a military leader,
imagine what kind of pandemonium and tumult could
be handed to the enemy when such a valiant com¬
mander and chivalrous amir would lead such brave
people. Like hungry lions, they were thirsty for the
blood of the enemies of their homeland!
The esteemed English state employed a prudent
policy and preemptively sent a delegation to the late
amir, before the latter set out for Kabul. The delega¬
tion carried a confidential letter containing an offer for
peace and negotiation. When his majesty arrived in the
Charikar district of Kuhistan, approximately 300,000
armed civilians of the region and a number of soldiers
from the regular army were ready to serve him. As a
result of the agreement, which was signed at Zima, the
English troops left Afghanistan in safety, and the con¬
trol of the affairs of Afghanistan was passed on to the
capable and strong hands of the wise, intelligent, and
brave king. Here, it will not be an exaggeration if we
say that because of this incident, the esteemed English
state became greatly indebted to his majesty the late
amir, for had he chosen, the amir could have brought
much misery upon the English army. Therefore, if the
good English state claims that it has approved the le¬
gitimacy of the Afghan government, the exalted gov¬
ernment can also assert that it saved their troops from
certain annihilation.
This ushered in an era of renewal for Afghanistan,
as after a period of foreign domination, once again
the independent state of Afghanistan was established.
We will not discuss all the work and progress that
was made during the tenure of his late majesty, as it
has not yet been forgotten from our memories. In
short, we will just mention that under his majesty’s
leadership Afghanistan became a mighty and power¬
ful state, with all the aptitude and potential to estab¬
lish and build a great Islamic state in Asia.
After the demise of that founder of the kingdom,
came the turn of his eldest and wisest son, his great
and enlightened majesty, the beacon of the nation and
128 Mahmud Tarzi
the religion, Amir Habibullah Khan [reigned 1901-
1919]. This sovereign’s ever-increasing innate talent
and capability has caused continuous growth and
advancement. So much so that at this moment Af¬
ghanistan has gained such an important place in the
continent of Asia that it would be appropriate to call
it the beam of the scale of justice and equality in Asia.
It is precisely for this reason that one is compelled
to pose the question:
“What is to be done at this time?”
Yes, Muslims must ask this question of one an¬
other. They must think and deliberate on their state
of being. Time is very limited, and the opportunity
for attack will soon be lost. One moment of negli¬
gence results in a day of damage. One day of dam¬
age entails a month of lagging behind. One month
of lagging behind means a year of retardation. One
year of retardation is an entire lifetime of regret. In
this case, all the trees, stones, mountains, deserts, sky,
and space would recite in unison:
“It is useless to have regrets later.”
If we carefully study questions such as “What
were we and what have we become?” and “What
have they done?” we will arrive at the issue of “What
is to be done?” Some say that even if we so desired,
it would be impossible to return to the state of affairs
as it appeared 1,300 years ago. The serenity, the just¬
ness, and the righteous morality of the four compan¬
ions of the Prophet [the first four caliphs] ended with
them, for in that golden time of happiness the rays
of the light of that brightest of moons were still shin¬
ing in the hearts of people, keeping them in clear
conscience. The farther we have come from the bril¬
liant sunshine of that era, the darker our hearts and
minds have become.
We, however, consider this a lame excuse. We see
the truth in a different light. We do not attribute our
backwardness and the darkness of our age to the
withdrawal of that light. That kind of light will not
distance itself from us until the day of judgment.
Were that light limited to a particular time period, all
would have ended at the close of that golden age. But
we believe that light shines over the entire world and
for all time. The whole world will be enlightened by
it until the end of days. The only reason for this dark¬
ness and this abject baseness of ours is that we have
distanced ourselves from that light.
The Holy Qur’an is a sacred and steadfast book
and a venerable right path that has been sent to guide
and direct all of humankind. Alas, most of us Mus¬
lims have reserved that life-giving holy book for our
dead, and read from it only for the souls of departed
ones. We consider that great book, sent to heal and
bless the inhabitants of the earth, as a book for the
dead. More than in any other place, we hear recita¬
tions of the Holy Qur’an in cemeteries and before
corpses! This is not to say that we must not recite the
Qur’an for the souls of the dead—rather, the living
should also read it to improve their own lives.
All of the miseries and adversities that have come
upon us are from our ignorance of the Qur’an, and
of our duties toward ourselves and toward humanity
and the world. All our destitution and impoverish¬
ment is a result of ignorance and lack of education.
The Holy Qur’an has shown us that knowledge is life
and ignorance death, that knowledge is light and ig¬
norance darkness. Regrettably, we read our Qur’an
and memorize it too quickly without pondering its
meaning. We do not apply this effective weapon to
the needs of our time. Our Qur’an expresses and
explains to us that all things in the universe are
conquerable. Therefore, if we put into practice that
which is taught to us, with the help of science and
knowledge, we can achieve the conquest of all things,
and put them to use for ourselves and our countries.
If we dominate our mountains, mines, oceans, and
rivers, we have done nothing more than obey the
commands of our Qur’an.
Urgent Actions
O, our Muslim brothers! We have much urgent ac¬
tion to take and very little lime. Whatever we do, we
must do it fast. We must move fast and wake up at
once, or else we will soon be hunted in our sleep, as
happened to so many of us before.
First, we must read carefully our Holy Qur’ an and
make its glorious commands our guide for this world
and the next. We must organize large gatherings of
scholars, scientists, and specialists of Islam in each
and every Muslim country. In those gatherings, we
must carefully study the sacred book and translate its
beneficial passages into all languages that Muslims
speak. We must then publish the translations abun¬
dantly and distribute them to the entire Islamic world,
so that Muslims learn that this is not just a book for
the afterlife and for the dead, but one that covers the
WHAT IS TO BE DONE?
129
entire universe and all its creatures. In bestowing that
book on us. He has bestowed the universe and its
creatures on us.
It is because we are ignorant of the Qur’an that
we commit such vile and immoral acts as bribery,
falsehood, slander, hypocrisy, and bigotry. We cause
resentment and envy by inventing lies and false ac¬
cusations. We destroy any chance of brotherly sym¬
pathy and cooperation. We commit, with much cer¬
titude, these and many other unmentionable acts.
Curiously, we feel that we have been absolved of all
our sins when we bow in prayer a couple of times or
recite a few passages of the Holy Qur’an. In fact,
prayers benefit only one’s self, while such acts [as
bribery, lies, and the like] unsettle the foundations
of Islam. Just as prayer is prescribed in the Qur’an,
those vile acts are proscribed. Therefore, if we truly
learned from our Qur’an, we would act differently.
Second, as the Holy Qur’an dictates, we must
adopt unity as the very foundation of our principles.
Let us begin with individuals, then spread this unity,
this harmony and oneness, to all the tribes and clans
of the various Islamic nations. This task, however,
will require great sacrifice, effort, and perseverance.
Societies, clubs, associations, and schools must be
established all over the Islamic world, especially
during the time of pilgrimage to the holy shrines of
Medina and Mecca, where Muslims of different back¬
grounds gather. This unification must be based on the
principles of survival, progress, and Islamic uplift.
The land of the Franks [that is, Europe] has a great
and uncontrollable fear of this Islamic unity. How¬
ever, our aim and indeed the aim of all of Islam, is
not to form a union and then confront the Christians,
but rather to unite for the purpose of our own
community’s advancement, improvement, civiliza¬
tion, and cooperation. It would be a terrible crime to
use the unification of Islam against Christianity. For
example, to provoke the Muslims of India, China, or
Turkistan against their respective ruling states would
be to commit an atrocious crime. The purpose of their
unity would be to replace malice and hypocrisy with
benevolence, friendship, and harmony. Concurrently
and jointly they should preoccupy themselves with
the task of protecting the Qur’an, the faith, rights, and
morality. Together with other Muslims they should
try to reach the levels of education and sciences that
their rulers possess. They should then spread their
knowledge to their brothers, both free and needy, and
preserve their right to their own resources. Praise be
to God, day by day we witness an increasing incli¬
nation toward such unity among Muslims. The Holy
Qur’ an commands unity. If Muslims are not yet there,
it is because of their lack of understanding of the
meaning of the Qur’anic ordinances. We find, for
example, the Ottoman Empire struggling in an abyss
of disunity. Iran is an even worse case, while Af¬
ghanistan also suffers due to the animosity, rivalry,
and bloodshed that obviously prevails among its
many tribes, clans, and races. It is therefore incum¬
bent upon Muslims to draw strength from their ab¬
solute faith in the Qur’an and sow the seeds of unity
in the field of the Islamic world, so that they may
collect its fortuitous fruits.
Third, we must consider science and industry as
a depreciated asset, and seek it aggressively. This is
especially recommended for independent countries
such as the Ottoman, Iranian, and Afghan states,
which unfortunately make no use of their minerals,
that is, their mines. European states, by contrast, not
only exploit their own mines but also those of the
entire world. In addition to natural resources, they are
also capable of industrial production. This is simply
because they have the knowledge and we do not. We
remain deprived of thousands of things, for lack of
knowledge, while others with the knowledge have
acquired them. Minerals are but one example. To
achieve this, there is only one remedy for Iran and
Afghanistan, and that is to send and expose our chil¬
dren to schools, colleges, and workshops. There is
no cure except to build an infrastructure in our coun¬
tries for scientific education, especially at the elemen¬
tary and secondary levels. If we start work today, we
may see results in 10 years. The more we delay, the
greater loss we will have to face.
Fourth, in the esteemed Ottoman Empire every
citizen has become a soldier [in the Balkan Wars].
The same practice must be enforced in Iran and Af¬
ghanistan. The nation that does not take responsibil¬
ity for protecting its nationhood and its statehood by
participating in its country's armed forces has evaded
its obligation toward its homeland and national
honor. Such people will surely be punished in this
world and the next. To suggest that all join the armed
forces does not mean that the entire population of
Afghanistan must simultaneously take up arms. It
means that each and every citizen, without exception,
upon reaching the age of twenty-one, should become
30 Mahmud Tarzi
a conscript. The duration of their training should be
two years, at the end of which they will leave the
military with the knowledge of military basics. In this
manner, in a matter of a few years, the issue of all
becoming soldiers will have been resolved.
Although there are many more things that we need
to do, at this moment I will limit my humble sugges¬
tions to the above four items.
Epilogue and Apology
This humblest of creatures of the Creator of land and
ocean has written this small and inadequate essay,
and has presented it to readers along with the twenty-
fourth issue of my newspaper, which is the last issue
of the first year. Despite the fact that better-written
essays on this topic have appeared many times in the
Islamic press, I ignored my shortcomings and wrote
this piece. My courage came from the conviction that
speaking out and writing are always better than not
saying or writing anything. No doubt the present
work will not adequately and entirely answer the
question, “What is to be done?” However, this hum¬
ble essay will serve in opening the door for more
writings of this sort, and in provoking thought and
debate. It is therefore hoped that scholars and intel¬
lectuals who believe in the progress of Islam through
such means will produce writings of their precious
and beneficial thoughts and suggestions. Also, I hope
that our generous readers will forgive any error or
shortcoming that they may find in this humble work.
In conclusion, I pray to the Almighty, in His sublime
greatness, to bestow prosperity, progress, and en¬
lightenment upon all Muslim brothers.
SECTION 3
Ottoman Empire
This page intentionally left blank
15
‘Abd al-Qadir al-Jaza’iri
Reminding the Intelligent,
Notifying the Unmindful
'Abd al-Qadir ibn Muhyi al-Din al-jaza'iri (Algeria-Syria, circa 1807-1883) was an antico¬
lonial military leader and, later, a mystic scholar who strove to adapt Islam to the modem
era through a reinterpretation of the teaching of the medieval mystic, Ibn Arabi (I 165-
1240). Born into a prominent Sufi family in western Algeria, Abd al-Qadir was chosen to
lead the resistance to French occupation of the country in 1832. Following his surrender
in 1847, during five years of captivity in France, he went through an acute spiritual crisis.
At the same time, he was impressed by the material progress achieved in the West. His
espousal of the scientific-rationalist approach and his criticism of blind imitation ( taqlid )
were consolidated in the form of mystical visions after his release, when he settled in
Damascus. There, in addition to his efforts to prevent the anti-Christian riots of 1860,
Abd al-Qadir dedicated himself to the mission of creating and guiding an elect circle of
disciples toward the spiritual regeneration of the Muslim world. This circle adopted the
modernist ideology of the Salafiyya, in contrast to the Islamic populist policies of Otto¬
man Sultan Abdulhamid II (reigned 1876-1909). The selections translated here come
from a book—completed just before Abd al-Qadir's arrival in Damascus, and first pub¬
lished in French translation—stressing the compatibility of the scientific-rationalist approach
with Muslim faith. 1
On Knowledge and Ignorance
The intelligent person must consider the statement
rather than the person who is stating it. If a statement
proves to be true, one should accept it, whether this
person is known to be a person of truth or of false¬
hood. For gold is derived from dust, the narcissus
from bulbs, and antidotes from snakes. The rose is
picked from among thorns. People should be mea¬
sured according to the truth, not the truth according
to [the reputation of] people. The goal of the intelli¬
gent person is a word of wisdom, and he is prepared
to receive it from whomever possesses it, be they
commoner or notable. The lowest level of intelligent
persons is to be distinguished from the common
‘Abd al-Qadir ibn Muhyi al-Din al-Jaza’iri, Dhikra al-'aqil
wa tanbih al-ghafil (Reminding the Intelligent and Notifying
the Unmindful) (Beirut, Lebanon: Dar al-Yaqza al-‘Arabiyya,
1966), pp. 33-38, 81-89. First published in 1855. Transla¬
tion from Arabic and introduction by Itzchak Weismann.
1. Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Jaza’iri, Tuhfa al-
za ’ir ft ta ’rtkh al-jaza 'ir wa al-amir ‘Abd al-Qadir (The Gift
for the Visitor of the History of Algeria and Amir Abd al-
Qadir) (Beirut, Lebanon: Dar al-Yaqza al-‘Arabiyya, 1964);
people’s level in certain things. Among them is not
to feel disgust at honey even if it is found in a
bleeder’s glass. Intelligent persons recognize that
blood is defiling in and of itself; it is not defiling
because it is in this glass. 2 Since honey is not defil¬
ing, being within a vessel used for blood does not
make it so, and there is no need to feel averse toward
it. Most people yield to this false impression. When¬
ever a statement is ascribed to a person they believe
to be good, they accept it, even if erroneous. But, if
the statement is ascribed to someone they believe to
be bad, they reject it, even if correct. They always
measure the truth according to the person, rather than
the person according to the truth. This is the utmost
in ignorance and decadence. A person who needs an
Raphael Danziger, Abd al-Qadir and the Algerians: Resis¬
tance to the French and Internal Consolidation (New York:
Holmes and Meier. 1977); Michel Chodkiewicz, The Spiri¬
tual Writings of Amir Abd al-Kader (Albany: State Univer¬
sity of New York Press. 1995); Itzchak Weismann, Taste of
Modernity: Sufism, Salafiyya, and Arabism in Late Ottoman
Damascus (Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 2000).
2. [An old medical technique involved the removal of
blood, often into glass cups.—Ed.]
133
I 34 ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Jaza’iri
antidote but shrinks from taking it upon learning that
it is extracted from snakes is ignorant. This person
should be made aware that such aversion is pure ig¬
norance, and that it deprives him of the desired bene¬
fit. For knowledgeable people it is easy to distinguish
between correct and false statements, between true
and vain beliefs, and between worthy and repugnant
deeds. Such things do not confuse them, and they do
not follow others by imitating their beliefs and opin¬
ions. These are the marks of the ignorant.
People whom others follow are divided into two
types. One is the knowledgeable, who help both
themselves and others. Such a person measures the
truth according to the evidence rather than accept¬
ing it blindly, and calls others to do the same. The
other type is destructive of themselves and of oth¬
ers. They imitate the opinions and beliefs of their
fathers and ancestors while neglecting their own
judgment, and call upon others to engage in taqlid
[imitation]. The blind cannot lead the blind. Even
more reprehensible and unsatisfactory than imitating
people, however, is the blind following of books. It
is better to follow a beast than an imitator. The opin¬
ions of the ‘ulama ’ [religious scholars] and the de¬
vout are often contradictory and conflicting, since
preferring [one opinion to othersj without any
grounds for doing so is unjustified, as it can be coun¬
tered by equally valid arguments.
Every human being is capable, by nature, of per¬
ceiving truth. The relation of the mind [literally, the
“heart”], the seat of knowledge, to the reality of things
is like the relation of a mirror to colored forms that
appear on its face one after the other. It is true, there
are hindrances that may prevent the forms from being
reflected in the mirror. These include a deficiency in
the mirror’s form deriving from the substance of the
iron [from which mirrors used to be made], before it
was given its round shape and polish; the poor condi¬
tion and corrosion of the mirror, even if its shape is
perfect; inaccurate direction of the mirror toward the
objects, as when they are behind it; a barrier that is
placed between the mirror and the form; and ignorance
as to the location of the desired figure, which makes
it difficult to turn the mirror toward it.
Similarly, the mind is a mirror capable of reflect¬
ing the forms of all phenomena. Minds may be de¬
void of knowledge because of these same five causes.
One is deficiency in the mind itself, as in the case of
a child’s mind, which is still incomplete. A second
cause concerns the impurity of worldly concerns and
the resulting wickedness that accumulates on the face
of the mind. The endeavor to uncover the reality of
things, and the avoidance of distracting occupations,
would clear and purify the mind. Third comes its
turning away from the direction of the desired truth.
The fourth cause regards barriers ( hijab ). An intel¬
lect immersed in contemplating a certain truth may
nonetheless miss it because of a [false] preconcep¬
tion that the man imbibed in his youth by way of
uncritical acceptance and good faith. This is a for¬
midable obstacle, which prevents most people from
attaining the truth. Such people are veiled by tradi¬
tional beliefs that have become deeply rooted in their
souls and stiffen their minds.
Fifth is the ignorance of the direction in which the
object is to be found. Seekers cannot attain a thing
without referring to the relevant sciences. They must
refer to them and arrange them in the specific way
defined by the scholars. In this way they may find
the necessary direction, and the reality of the object
will be revealed to their minds.
Knowledge that is not self-evident can be caught
only with the net of the acquired sciences. Moreover,
every piece of knowledge can be deduced only from
two antecedents, harmonized and combined in a defi¬
nite manner. Their combination brings a third piece
of knowledge, like the offspring produced from the
copulation of male and female animals. Thus, to pro¬
duce a horse, one cannot use an ass and a camel, but
only a pair of horses. Similarly, every perception has
two specific sources, combined in a specific way.
Lack of knowledge of these sources, and of the na¬
ture of their combination, hinders that perception. As
we mentioned, this is like ignorance of the figure’s
location. This is exemplified in the case of a person
who wants to see the back of his head in the mirror.
If he places the mirror in front of his face, he cannot
direct it to reflect the back of his head, and if he places
it behind his head, in the correct direction, he re¬
moves it from his eyes and can see neither the mir¬
ror nor the back of his head reflected in it. He needs
another mirror to be put behind his head, while the
first one remains in front of his eyes. Observing the
appropriate position of the two mirrors, the back of
his head will be reflected in the mirror directed to¬
ward it, and this will be reflected in the other mirror
facing the eyes.
Similarly, in seeking knowledge and striving to
understand things, there are odd paths that are even
more oblique to the goal than the example of the
REMINDING THE INTELLIGENT
135
mirror. These are the causes that prevent minds from
recognizing realities. Normally, each mind is able,
by divine providence, to perceive such realities. Like
a person who cannot see what stands in front of him
without moving the pupils of his eyes a great deal
from side to side, so the mind will not perceive the
reality of things if it does not move from concept to
concept. These movements are called thinking and
contemplation. And like the looking eye that cannot
see without light, such as that of the sun, so the mind
cannot perceive realities correctly without the lights
of success and guidance from God, the most exalted.
Validating Revealed Knowledge
Know—may God give you success—that although
the intellect attained eminence and an ability to ex¬
plain the reality of things, there remains knowledge
that it can neither achieve nor be guided to, but is
obtained only by trusting and obeying the prophets
and their successors. The sciences of the prophets are
superior to intellectual knowledge, that which, as we
have said, is inherent in the nature of the mind and
which one finds when turning one’s attention to ac¬
quire it. Nevertheless, although the intellect is sepa¬
rate from the information brought by the prophets that
one is ordered to follow, it is capable of perceiving
it, submitting to their commandments, and approv¬
ing its content once they make it known to them.
The proof that there are suprarational sciences is
that God, most exalted, created humankind devoid
of any knowledge about His innumerable creatures,
which only He can comprehend. He then gave hu¬
mankind the sense of touch to discern tangible things
of all types, but since humans could as yet grasp
neither voices nor colors, they remained to human¬
kind as if nonexistent. Thereafter, God created human
sight, which enabled them to perceive part of the
creation, insofar as they could go beyond the tan¬
gible. In the following stage He accorded them the
faculty of discernment to recognize abstract realities
beyond the tangible things. From there humankind
proceeded to yet another stage, the stage of the in¬
tellect, which allowed them to perceive additional
things. Then one progresses to another level, the level
of the intellect in which one perceives matters im¬
perceptible in any of the preceding levels. Beyond
the intellect is a further level involving other matters
from which the intellect is separated, which it can¬
not obtain by itself but rather requires [the aid of]
someone else, just as the senses are separate from
intellectual perception.
The sciences located in the mind are divided into
two types: rational and revealed. By the term ratio¬
nal knowledge we mean that which is naturally com¬
manded by the intellect, which is apart from indirect
knowledge ( taqlid ) and revealed knowledge ( sama ')•
This, in turn, is divided into self-evident and acquired
knowledge. Self-evident, for example, is human¬
kind’s knowledge that a single item cannot be in two
places at the same time, or that a thing cannot be both
existent and nonexistent. People find such knowledge
in themselves and recognize it without knowing
where it comes from. I mean, they do not recognize
the ultimate cause [of their knowledge]—that it is of
course God who created it and guided them to that
knowledge. Acquired knowledge is that obtained by
learning, inference, and reflection. Another type of
knowledge located in the mind is revealed knowl¬
edge, which is received from the prophets. It is ob¬
tained by studying the revealed books such as the
Torah, the Gospels, the Psalms, and the Criterion [the
Qur’an], By understanding their concepts, they are
revealed. By this [revelational knowledge] the intel¬
lect is perfected and delivered from illness.
Thus the rational sciences, although necessary, are
insufficient to ensure our welfare, just as the intellect
is insufficient to preserve bodily health. Humans need
to know the particulars of medicine and remedies by
learning them from doctors, since the intellect alone
is incapable of arriving at them. Nevertheless, the
intellect is the only means for comprehending such
knowledge after it is learned. The intellect cannot do
without the revealed sciences, and these cannot do
without the intellect. Therefore, those who call on
people to adopt pure imitative knowledge and avoid
rationality are ignorant, while those who are satis¬
fied with rationality at the expense of the revealed
sciences are deluded. Beware not to belong to either
of those groups but to combine them! The rational
sciences are like nourishment and the revealed sci¬
ences are like medication. The sick may be harmed
by food if they neglect their medicine. Similarly, the
minds of all creatures are sick, and there is no treat¬
ment for them but the medications prepared by the
prophets, namely the duties of worship. Those who
are satisfied with rational knowledge will be harmed
by it like the sick person who is harmed by food, as
happens to some. It is said: a discerning person who
136 ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Jaza’iri
grasps all of intelligible knowledge and affirms that
the world has a creator has attained absolute perfec¬
tion; humankind’s felicity corresponds to its knowl¬
edge, and its distress corresponds to its ignorance.
One’s intellect brings one to this felicity.
Be careful not to assume that the revealed sciences
are contradictory or incompatible with the rational
sciences. On the contrary, everything the Prophet
ordained is in full harmony with sound reason. It is
true that there are certain details in the laws brought
by the prophets that the intellect rejects, but this de¬
rives from the intellect’s own shortcomings. Had it
understood the method behind the stipulation, the in¬
tellect would have recognized that this is the truth,
which one should not abandon.
An example from Islamic law ( shar ‘) involves the
rulings concerning gold and silver. The law forbids
their accumulation without giving part to the poor and
needy; it prohibits the use of dishes and cups made out
of them; it bans the sale of gold or silver for profit.
Yet, if people were told to give part of them to the poor,
or else they would be burnt in hell, they would surely
reply, “This is unacceptable. I worked hard to gather
them, so why should I now give them to people who
were sleeping and resting? This is unreasonable!” If
they were told not to eat and drink from golden or sil¬
ver table utensils, or else they will be burnt in hell, they
would similarly reply. “This is unacceptable. I will do
with my property what I want and no one can dispute
it. Why should 1 be punished for making use of my
property? This is unreasonable!” And if these people
were told not to sell gold and silver for profit or else
they would bum in hell, they would again have said,
“I buy and sell with the mutual consent of myself and
my business partners. Without buying and selling, the
world would be ruined and the public interest impeded.
This is irrational!”
They are right [to say that it is irrational], since
their intellect is incapable of understanding the pun¬
ishment for such things and requires explanation.
It should be explained to them that the wisdom
behind God’s creation of gold and silver is their use
for the sustenance of the world. In themselves these
are merely two metals which have no utility. They
ward off neither heat nor cold, nor do they nourish the
body. Nonetheless everybody needs them. This is
because every person has many needs, for nourishment
and clothing. A person may lack necessities and pos¬
sess unneeded things. For example, in the case of one
who owns wheat but needs a horse, while a friend
owns a horse but needs wheat. An exchange will cer¬
tainly take place between these two, and it would be
necessary to assess the relative value [of these com¬
modities], since the owner of the horse would not hand
it over for just any amount of wheat. There is also no
correlation between wheat and horses to allow ex¬
changing them for a similar weight or shape. Thus one
doesn’t know how to assess the value of a horse in
wheat, and transactions, in this example and its like,
would become impossible. Consequently, people felt
the need for an adequate medium to decide between
them. For this reason God created gold and silver, to
serve as a standard in all transactions. Accordingly, a
horse may be worth a hundred dinars, and a certain
amount of wheat has the same value.
Regulation by gold and silver is possible precisely
because they have no purpose in themselves. God
created them only to circulate among the people and
serve as means of exchange. Their value is unified
in relation to all commodities, and possessing them
is like possessing everything. Thus, the owner of a
horse, for example, owns only that particular horse.
If he is in need of food, he may find that the one who
has it prefers to buy a garment rather than a horse. It
is therefore necessary to have something that seems
to have no form, but actually has an overall signifi¬
cance, bearing an equal relation to the various com¬
modities. It resembles a mirror, which has no color
but reflects all the colors. Gold and silver have no
purpose in themselves, but they are means for all
purposes. Therefore, whoever uses them contrary to
divine wisdom will be punished in the Hereafter,
unless God permits. Those who hoard gold and sil¬
ver without setting aside a certain amount for the poor
thwart the underlying reason [of their creation], act¬
ing like one who imprisons a judge and prevents him
from arbitrating and resolving disputes among the
people. God did not create gold and silver especially
for one person or another, but to circulate among all
of them and serve as a standard. Undoubtedly, if the
intellect understands that, it will confirm that hoard¬
ing gold and silver is an act of oppression and will
justify punishment. God most high creates nothing
in vain. He entrusted the living of the poor to the
wealthy, but the wealthy have oppressed the poor and
deprived them of the rights accorded them by God.
We therefore say: people who make dishes and
cups out of gold and silver are oppressors. They are
worse than those who hoard and amass [gold and
silver], since their behavior is like that of a person
REMINDING THE INTELLIGENT
137
who turns the judge of the city into a hatmaker, a
tailor, a butcher—any job that could be performed
by the meanest member of society. Copper, lead, and
clay, rather than gold and silver, should be used for
holding food and drink. These [chosen substances]
can hold liquids, but clay, iron, copper, and lead, on
the other hand, cannot fulfill the task of gold and
silver. If the intellect knows this, it undoubtedly
would not hesitate to approve of [this prohibition]
and to punish those who transgress it.
We also claim that selling gold and silver for
profit, turning them into objects of commerce in their
own right, is contrary to divine wisdom. An owner
of cloth, for instance, who wants to buy food might
not be able to exchange food for cloth; he is there¬
fore permitted to buy it with gold or silver, thereby
obtaining his goal. [Gold and silver] are means to an
end and not ends themselves. But owners of gold or
silver who want to trade them for gold or silver are
prevented from doing so, because by remaining re¬
stricted from circulation, the effect is as if they were
hoarded. Moreover, thus obstructing God or the
Prophet from conveying necessities to others is an
act of oppression. The only purpose of buying gold
and silver for their own sake is to hoard them, and
when the intellect understands this [role] it approves
both the prohibition and the punishment for trans¬
gressing it. Nevertheless, buying gold with silver, or
vice versa, is permissible, since they differ in the
ways they help satisfy the necessities of life, silver
being more abundant and more easily divided among
various needs. What is prohibited is interfering with
its intended function, namely, to facilitate the attain¬
ment of other commodities.
Consequently, to those who sell silver or gold
for a fixed period for profit [as a form of interest¬
making], such as selling at 10 to get back 20 after a
year, we say that the foundation of society and the
basis of all religions are to promote love and har¬
mony, mutual assistance and cooperation. Those who
are in need and find someone who will give them
credit can assume the good-heartedness of their credi¬
tor and believe in his kindness. They will regard aid
and support [of the creditor] as requirements. Prohib¬
iting the sale of gold and silver at a profit over a fixed
period thus preserves the utility of loans, which is
among the noblest ends.
These few examples, from all that might be cited,
make it clear that the revealed law is not incompat¬
ible with reason. All the commandments and inter¬
dictions of the prophets intend to be harmonious with
reason. None of them contradicts it, though for some
[rules] the human intellect alone is not a sufficient
guide. However, when it is properly guided, it real¬
izes and complies. Like the skilled physician who
commands the secrets of various treatments that the
ignorant think farfetched, so are the prophets, whose
knowledge the intellect is unable to obtain save
through instruction. The intelligent person is com¬
pelled to accept them, after inquiring into their truth.
16
Ali Suavi
Democracy: Government by
the People, Equality
Ali Suavi (Turkey, 1839-1878) was a leading figure in the Young Ottoman political reform
movement and in the search for Islamic justifications of constitutionalism. Trained both in
religious and secular schools, Suavi held a variety of administrative positions before em¬
barking on a career as a public intellectual in his mid-twenties. His pamphlets and sermons
in the $ehzade Mosque in Istanbul—introducing modem political terminology, criticizing
the government, and commenting on foreign relations—made him famous and led to his
banishment to the provinces, whence he fled to Europe. In London and then Paris, Suavi
published the journals Muhbir (The Reporter) and L 116m Gazetesi (Journal of the Sciences),
calling for constitutionalism in the Ottoman Empire. The article from Ulum Gazetesi pre¬
sented here, one of the first Ottoman works to use the term "democracy,” maintains that
Islamic precedent requires institutions of democratic consultation. In the 1870s, influenced
by conservative European thinkers, he began to criticize constitutionalism, and in 1876 he
appealed to Sultan Abdulhamid II (reigned 1876-1909) to be allowed to return to Istanbul.
Upon his pardon and return, Suavi served as a court librarian, a teacher of young princes,
and later the director of the Galatasaray Lycee, but his revolutionary sentiments had not
disappeared. He was dismissed from Galatasaray in December 1877. In the following months,
Suavi launched an unsuccessful uprising against the sultan, hoping to replace him with his
elder brother, who was more sympathetic to constitutionalism, Suavi was killed during this
attempt, known as the Qragan incident. 1
As is known, the forms of government are monarchy
(sultanate), aristocracy (government of notables), and
democracy (government by the people, equality).
During the early days of Islam, the form of gov¬
ernment was democracy. That is to say, there was no
sultanate, sultan, or king, but rather equality. Some
words of Khalid ibn al-Walid [Muslim commander,
died 642] (may God be pleased with him) will suf¬
fice to explain the [nature of] the Islamic government.
It so happened that a Byzantine commander named
Bahan, [acting on behalf of] Heraclius [Byzantine
emperor, reigned 610-641], engaged in a battle with
the Companions [of the Prophet Muhammad] with
troops numbering 600,000 [in one account] or 700,000
in another. 2 Bahan invited Khalid ibn al-Walid to his
tent on the pretext of discussing the terms of an armi-
[Ali Suavi], “Demokrasi: Hiikumet-i Halk, Miisavat” (De¬
mocracy: Government by the People, Equality), Ulum
Gazetesi (Journal of the Sciences), Paris, France, volume 2,
number 18, May 17, 1870, pp, 1083-1107. Translation from
Turkish and introduction by M. §iikrii Hanioglu.
stice, but in reality to seize him by trickery. Upon
Khalid’s arrival at Bahan’s tent with approximately a
hundred courageous warriors, the latter rose and made
a speech in Arabic: “Thanks be to God, who made our
Lord Jesus the best of the prophets, our king the best
of kings, and our [Christian] community the most
excellent of communities.”
When Bahan began his speech with these words,
Khalid could not bear it and interrupted, launching
into an oration to refute the words of Bahan:
Thanks be to God, who made us believers in
Muhammad (peace be upon him), in your prophet
Jesus, and in all the prophets, and who made our ruler,
1. Hiiseyin Celik, Ali Suavi ve Donemi (Alt Suavi and His
Time ) (Istanbul, Turkey: iletijim Yayinlari, 1994); Ismail
Dogan, Tanzimatin tki Ucu: Mtinif Pa§a ve Ali Suavi (The
Tanzimat's Two Extremes: Miinif Pa§a and Ali Suavi)
(Istanbul, Turkey: Iz Yaymcilik, 1991); §erif Mardin, The
Genesis of Young Ottoman Thought (Princeton, N.J.:
Princeton University Press, 1962), pp. 360-384.
2. At that battle the number of Muslim troops was 41.000.
138
DEMOCRACY: GOVERNMENT BY THE PEOPLE
139
whom we ourselves chose to charge with our affairs,
a man like us—so much so that if our ruler were to
claim to be a king over us, we would immediately
depose him. We would never think that our ruler was
in any way superior to us, unless it be that he is more
pious than us, and so on. That is to say, he possesses
the virtue of piety required by the principle of
Commanding Right and Forbidding Wrong.
Thus at a time when Byzantines, Armenians, and
Europeans recognized kings, the men of God, that is
to say Khalid and the Companions, thought this way
about the Commander of the Faithful. 3 What this
means is that at that time the Islamic government was
a democracy. There was equality.
The following incident likewise throws light on
the matter.
When cloth from the Yemen was divided among
the Companions, ‘Umar, the Commander of the
Faithful, received the same share as everybody else.
One day ‘Umar, wearing a robe made from this
cloth, was addressing the Companions from the pul¬
pit to encourage them to jihad [religious struggle],
when one of the Companions arose and said, ‘“Umar,
from now on we will not listen to you.” ‘Umar asked,
“Why?” The Companion responded, “Because you
have privileged yourself instead of remaining equal
with us. Because during the division of the Yemeni
cloth you too received your share. The robe that we
now see on you cannot have been made from that
piece. Thus you must have received a bigger piece
than us to be able to make such a robe. In this way
you have become privileged.” Upon hearing these
words, ‘Umar turned to his son ‘Abdullah [died 693]
and said, “‘Abdullah, answer this man.” Thereupon
‘Abdullah rose and answered the man: ‘“Umar, the
Commander of the Faithful, wanted to make himself
a robe from the cloth that he had received as his share,
but it was not enough. So I gave my own share. Com¬
bining the two pieces produced such a robe.” Then
the objecting Companion said, “If so, we will con¬
tinue to listen to ‘Umar,” and sat down.
May God be pleased with all of them.
Now that the meaning of democracy, government
by the people, and equality is understood, we can go
on to say that this form of government was estab¬
lished in a place and among a people [that were alike
extraordinary], a single united, loyal, observant, and
3. At that time the ruler was ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab [sec¬
ond caliph, 634-644],
pious community. They had no fear other than the
fear of God, they had no work other than serving
God, they had no institutions ( tanzimat ) other than
good morals, in sum they were men of God. The
system of equality that Plato [Greek philosopher,
circa 427-347 b.c.] had merely imagined became a
reality in their time.
Now a French party, which has been growing day-
by-day in the name of freedom and equality, wants to
annihilate the monarchy and create equality in a demo¬
cratic system. But they do not have men of God among
them—that is to say, they do not have an overpower¬
ing force in their hearts such as fear of God.
In their language, freedom is tantamount to saying
whatever comes to one’s mind and doing whatever one
wants without any impediment. Thus an idea came to
some Frenchmen, they did as they wanted, and pub¬
lished a newspaper to deny the existence of God in
early May in Paris. Those who read this newspaper
know well the improper and shameless language that
they resort to against those who believe in God.
What will be the future of this nation that lacks a
morality limiting liberties within the community if
it does not possess an overpowering force to restrain
freedom and license in such a shameless country?
Undoubtedly this beautiful Paris, this prosperous
France that the entire world strives to imitate, will
be ruined in a year or two.
Democracy, [that is to say] equality, is a nightin¬
gale that can sing loudly only in the rose garden of
good morality. Would such a beloved nightingale
sing in such a dunghill of [corrupt] hearts?
Since French ideas on democracy have not re¬
mained confined to their country but are being dis¬
seminated through the press to the east, west, north,
and south, they will one day cause trouble even in
Istanbul, Cairo, Tehran, Bukhara, and Kabul. There¬
fore, let us take a glance at these lands of ours.
Morality in our big cities is worse than in those
of the Europeans. We have reached such a position
that a man who spends two hours in the company of
a woman and controls his desire will be pointed out
and reckoned to have miraculous powers. Do we not
repeat in conversations and in our books as an ex¬
traordinary event that “[Mehmed] Ebussu‘ud Efendi
[Turkish religious leader, 1490-1574] found himself
in the same room with a girl one night but controlled
his desire and did not touch her.”
In Europe, a man may stay with a woman for
three days and nights, and it may not even occur to
140 Ali Suavi
him [to have sex with her]. This nevertheless is con¬
sidered an indecent act. In our country, can this be¬
havior, whether attributed to increased sexual de¬
sire due to the warmer climate, or to the passion
aroused by veiling in the cities—no such impatience
being observed among nomads and peasants—or to
whatever cause, be brought under control with good
morals or not? There lies the problem. All our situa¬
tions and acts are similar to this matter of sexual
desire. It is necessary for us to educate ourselves by
refining our morals.
The present disposition of the peoples of our
countries does not simply expect the government to
regulate their material needs. Rather they look for a
government that will also satisfy their moral needs—
in short, one which will instill good morals in people
through superior force. This superior force is the
monarchy, that is to say the sultanate.
Today if even ‘Umar came to us, what would he
achieve?
For example, suppose someone got up and said:
“Women too are human beings. They have the right
to socialize with men. You yourself even dispatched
women to war along with men.” ‘Umar would reply:
“Those women, those men were not you. Those were
decent people, but you are not.”
Everybody knows that democracy is the highest
form of egalitarian government and the most in ac¬
cord with the holy law. Unfortunately, the people of
Istanbul are not all like the shaykh of Gumiijhane
[Ahmed Ziyaeddin Giimujhanevi, Halidiyye Sufi
leader, 1813-1893], This is such a people that they
did not even feel the loss of a vast territory like Al¬
geria. It heard the rumblings in Samarqand, Tashkent,
and Bukhara as if they were the buzzing of a mos¬
quito. It bent down so low that 39 Ali Pashas could
jump over it [a leading Tanzimat statesman and Ot¬
toman grand vizier, 1815-1871].
We have become such a nation that when four of
our school children gather, they start playing a game
in which one of them becomes sultan and bestows
high offices upon the others. When four of our eld¬
erly statesmen gather in the name of patriotism, each
of them wants to announce his leadership and become
commander.
What market can there be for the values of broth¬
erhood and equality among a people with such
morals?
Mustafa Fazil Pasha [1829-1875, Egyptian
prince and Ottoman statesmen who financed the
Young Ottoman movement], who until yesterday led
so many people in the name of freedom and patrio¬
tism, has been silenced with a membership in the
Council of Ministers, despite the fact that he is as rich
as Croesus and not in need of any high offices or im¬
perial favors. He has not been affected in the slight¬
est degree by the sighs of all those believers whom
he encouraged in the name of patriotism and freedom
and whom he made prisoners in the fortresses of
Cyprus, Rhodes, and Acre.
A government is required that will not only sat¬
isfy the material needs but also see to the moral needs
of such an immoral and leprous people. If a ruler like
‘Umar is wanted, then one must have men of God like
‘Uthman [third caliph, 644-656], ‘Ali [ibn Abi Talib,
fourth caliph, 656-661], and Khalid.
They once proposed the principle of democracy
to Hajjaj [ibn Yusuf, one of the ablest governors
under the ‘Umayyad caliphate, 660-714], He replied,
“You be Abu Dharr [al-Ghifari, a devout compan¬
ion of the Prophet, died 653], and I’ll then be ‘Umar
for you.”
“Verily an evil patron, and verily an evil friend.”
[Qur’an, Sura 22, Verse 13]
It is not just Hajjaj who says this. The political
thinkers of modern Europe say the same. Jean-
Jacques Rousseau [French philosopher, 1712-1778]
says: “If there exist men of God, they should be gov¬
erned by democracy.”
In a book published this very year, entitled
Principes de la science politique [Principles of Po¬
litical Science], Monsieur [Felix Esquirou de] Parieu
[1815-1893] states (p. 382): “In civilized societies
the democratic way of government is excellent for
the well-being of the majority. This way of govern¬
ment, however, must be ripened, sufficiently ma¬
tured, and extremely well organized through the per¬
fect education of times and obstacles.”
Question: Since freedom and equality are among
the rights of man, the proper form of government is
the one that guarantees these rights. This form of
government is democracy.
Answer: What a nice idea! What a sound conclu¬
sion! There is no doubt that this is so. Let us, how¬
ever, move from theory to practice. Let us consider
whether it is possible to establish democracy in this
place or not? Here lies the problem. For when the
term “sound” is used in Muslim jurisprudence and
political science, the meaning of this phrase cannot
be separated from feasibility, practicability, and util-
DEMOCRACY: GOVERNMENT BY THE PEOPLE
141
ity. Monsieur Parieu says: “If the truth in question is
not ripe and mature, it is not the truth, for in politics
the truth cannot be separated from feasibility, prac¬
ticability, and utility” (p. 386).
The same idea is expressed in the rule put for¬
ward by our own jurists: “One must not issue a legal
opinion based on sound doctrine that is no longer
practiced.”
Is the only reason for the inapplicability of democ¬
racy in the Ottoman country bad morals? We have
spoken about morals as an example. The fact that the
country is divided between various continents, that
it is inhabited by many peoples differing in language,
custom, and religion, and its size are all obstacles in
the way of democracy and equality.
However many republics may have come into
being in the world up to now, they provide no ex¬
amples to show that equality can be put into practice
in a place like the Ottoman country; indeed they may
rather indicate the contrary.
Where do we currently find democracy? In San
Marino, do we not? That republic is composed of no
more than 8,000 individuals, for all that they consti¬
tute a nation. Liibeck has a population of 30,000.
Is there anything remarkable about the fact that
these and similar countries that resemble our small
towns are suited by their situations to be governed
by a republican regime? What is more, these coun¬
tries have been living under the protection of [larger]
powers.
The biggest republic in Europe is Switzerland,
which is the size of our Danube Province. Its popu¬
lation is only two and a half million people.
It is, however, extremely suitable for its present
system of government because of its circumstances.
There the republic is nothing other than a federation
of various states with each other. That is to say, in
Switzerland each state joined the federation on con¬
dition that it would retain its autonomy and admin¬
istration. What we have there is a federation where
only two tongues exist (German, French). There are
only 4,000 Jews in a population of two and a half
million people; there is no other religion but Chris¬
tianity. Moreover, each state is populated by one or
another of the various Christian sects. For instance.
Catholics and Protestants are not mixed. Nine can¬
tons are exclusively Catholic, and seven exclusively
Protestant. There are only six places in the twenty-
two cantons where Catholics and Protestants are
mixed. The Christians in Switzerland are extremely
pious and devout. This means that there is morality
there, not like in France.
Finally, it was only recently that Switzerland be¬
come a federation divided into twenty-two cantons,
and that a federal government was set up in Bern to
have oversight [of federal affairs]. Previously, the
term “republic” was just an empty title. This is be¬
cause the form of government was not uniform: three
cantons were aristocracies administered by aristo¬
crats, six cantons were democracies; where then was
equality?
Yes, one hears of a big republic in the New World,
the United States of America. This country, however,
cannot provide any model for our world. The Ameri¬
can government was created by the federation and
union of various independent provinces; it is a form
of government suitable to that region and to the cus¬
toms and circumstances of that region. It is divided
administratively into states, counties, and townships,
known respectively as Cities, Territories, and Dis¬
tricts. A region with a population of 600,000 people
is called a state. Every state preserves its adminis¬
trative independence and special privileges. There are
35 states, each of which joined on condition of pre¬
serving its administrative independence and privi¬
leges. This federation has a government in the city
of Washington. This federal government is made up
of a senate and a house of representatives. The presi¬
dent of the federal government is elected for four
years. There is also a vice-president. The federal
government does not intervene in the administration
of the states, that is to say, the regions with popula¬
tions of 600,000 each. It only administers the coun¬
ties. Townships are governed from the nearest place. 4
Something else that has to be said is that in truth
democracy is an illusion. For is not its literal mean¬
ing government by the people? In Greek demos
means people and kratos government. The basic idea
of government by the people is that the people gather
and decide in consultation on whatever regulations
need to be made or decisions taken—just as in the
days of the [early] caliphate people congregated in
the mosque. While it may be possible to govern a
little state with a small population through such gath¬
ering and consultation, how could this work in a
larger state? How could the individuals composing
such a population congregate? Doesn’t everybody
4. [Ali Suavi must have garbled his source on the admin¬
istrative system of the United States of America.—Trans.]
142 Ali Suavi
have work to do? How and when would they satisfy
their needs?
We can therefore judge with certainty that it is
not possible to establish a real democracy based on
this conception. It is because of this impossibility
that in the republics which exist today, the gather¬
ing of the people has given way to the gathering of
deputies. The chamber of deputies that works best
is that of Switzerland. There every 20,000 people
participate in the chamber through electing a
deputy. Does this not mean that the votes of 20,000
individuals are subsumed under this contract? As a
matter of fact, since unanimity in chambers com¬
posed of many deputies is virtually impossible,
experience has shown everywhere that one has to
go by the majority opinion. Indeed the current rule
is to go by the majority of the deputies actually
present in the chamber.
Under these circumstances, is it not meaningless
to call the opinion of the majority of the deputies
present the opinion of the people? Unfortunately,
such are the limits of feasibility and practicality.
Having dwelt upon this matter, we have succeeded
in differentiating the concepts of “soundness” and
“political truth” at both the levels of theory and prac¬
tice. Yet a conclusion has been reached from this
discussion: “If a state accepts a chamber of deputies,
it possesses the spirit of a republican form of gov¬
ernment as far as is practicable.”
If all these points about democracy have been un¬
derstood, let us again consider how democracy and
equality can be achieved in, for example, the Ottoman
lands. How could these many different ethnicities,
religions, sects, and tongues be gathered and united?
Could a federation be formed as in the case of
America? To believe in the possibility of such an
alliance is to believe in the possibility of Serbia in
Europe forming a federation with Egypt in Africa,
or Bulgaria in Eastern Europe forming one with Tu¬
nisia in Arab Africa—what a fantasy!
The point we have to grasp is that the Ottoman
state, for example, must be a state in conformity with
its geographical location, circumstances, and popu¬
lation, so that it has to be a sultanate.
However much republicanism puffs itself up, what
can it actually accomplish in France, England, or any¬
where else? We have to look at practice. When repub¬
lican regimes were established in France and England,
they became a source of corruption for the peoples of
the world, and inimical to its good order. The French
republic assaulted the Orient as her initial act. She
compelled the Ottoman state to enter into extremely
harmful alliances with England and Russia. Yet how
long-lasting these republics were to prove! Strangely
enough, while the republicans in England and France
speak about democracy, equality, and freedom, they
have no wish to relinquish their hold over Canada,
India, or Algeria. Just look how those Frenchmen talk
pretentiously about freedom and equality, all the while
seeking world domination like Caesar.
If there is going to be freedom and equality, let
them ask the Algerian Arabs, who have absolutely
no ethnic, religious, cultural, or geographical affin¬
ity with them [the French], whether or not they pre¬
fer their own rulers, however tyrannical they may be,
to the French republic?
Question: Should the administration in Istanbul
remain as it is now?
Answer: No, it should not. What should be done?
The parliamentary [form of government should be
adopted], that is to say government based upon the
principle of consultation—the form which France has
adopted this method in this very year 1870 a.d. What
is the relevance of this method for us? In essence, our
High Council [of Reforms] (Meclis-i Ali-i [Tanzimat])
should be enlarged, a chamber of deputies elected by
the people should be opened, and the ministers should
be held accountable. The accountability of ministers
means that their conduct of policy is discussed in the
chamber of deputies. The members examine and ques¬
tion it, and the ministers respond. In the end, if the
majority of the deputies give their approval with a
majority of votes, the ministers keep their offices. And
if the majority vote turns out to be against the conduct
of policy by the ministers, then they leave office.
Question: Under the circumstances, would the
treasury be able to raise money in a short period of
time? Would the state be able to impose its author¬
ity over the provinces in this huge country?
Answer: These are entirely different questions.
With the measures we have proposed, the Ottoman
state would establish its state power on a strong foun¬
dation in the specific regions of Rumelia and
Anatolia, where it currently is able to collect taxes
and conscript soldiers directly. That’s it. Only long¬
term policies will provide a remedy for fiscal prob¬
lems. Bringing provinces under control requires over¬
whelming force. In our own opinion, the time has
passed for the state in Istanbul to acquire such over¬
whelming force. There is no chance of this.
DEMOCRACY: GOVERNMENT BY THE PEOPLE
143
As far as Africa is concerned, if Tunisia, Tripoli
in Barbary, and Egypt can come to their senses
and unite, they will establish the best and the most
enduring Muslim state in the world. If not, then
the overwhelming power of Europe will conquer
Africa.
In that event, Istanbul could only lodge a pro¬
test as strong as the one it made regarding Algeria.
That’s it.
For those who share our views, this is inevitable.
That is to say, there is no remedy for it. But if Istanbul
adopts a policy of attempting to create a unified Af¬
rican state, and henceforth favors the birth of such a
state, then it will have found itself a great ally in the
cause of its own survival. And until the Day of Judg¬
ment the Ottoman dynasty will be given honorable
mention for this in the history books.
God knows best what is right.
17
Namik Kemal
And SeekTheir Counsel in the Matter
[Qur’an, Sura 3, Verse 159]
Namik Kemal (Turkey, 1840-1888) was a leading advocate of constitutionalism and a
famous poet and playwright. He received little formal education and spent much of his
childhood accompanying his grandfather, a government official who served in various
regions of the Ottoman Empire, In Kars, in eastern Anatolia, he studied Sufism. In Sofia,
Bulgaria—then an Ottoman province—he learned Arabic and Persian, and produced his
first poetry. In the 1860s, while working at the government Translation Bureau, he began
writing newspaper articles on literature and social problems, especially women's educa¬
tion. He also joined a constitutionalist group later known as the Young Ottomans Soci¬
ety, and was banished from Istanbul through appointment as assistant governor of Erzurum.
Kemal fled to Europe to publish an opposition journal, Hurriyet (Liberty). He penned most
of the journal’s articles—including the one translated here—explaining constitutionalism
in an Islamic context and attempting to reconcile shari'a (Islamic law) with European
theories of law. In 1870, Kemal returned to Istanbul and founded the newspaper I'bret
(The Moral), until performance of his patriotic play Votan yahud Silistre (Homeland orSilistria)
prompted public demonstrations, and he was exiled to Cyprus, Pardoned after three
years, Kemal was appointed to the Council of the State, and worked on the commission
preparing the Ottoman constitution, The following year, the sultan turned against con¬
stitutionalism and had its proponents arrested. Kemal was banished to the islands of Rhodes
and Chios—now in Greece—where he continued to write, defending Islam against Eu¬
ropeans' accusations of backwardness.
Being created free by God, man is naturally obliged
to benefit from this divine gift. General freedom is
protected within society because society can pro¬
duce a preponderant force to safeguard the indi¬
vidual from the fear of the aggression on the part
of another individual.
Accordingly, the service rendered by society in
this world is the creation of a preponderant force,
absolutely indispensable for the protection of free¬
dom, upon which the continued existence of human¬
ity is dependent. Thus the constitutive element of
Namik Kemal, “Wa shawirhum fi’l-amr” (And Seek Their
Counsel in the Matter), HUrriyet {Liberty), London, England,
number 4, July 20, 1868, pp. 1-4. Translation from Turkish
and introduction by M. §iikrii Hanioglu.
1. Omer Faruk Akiin, “Namik Kemal,” Islam Ansiklo-
pedisi (Encyclopedia of Islam), volume 9 (Istanbul, Tur¬
key: Maarif Matbaasi, 1971), pp. 54-72; Mehmed Kaplan,
Namik Kemal (Namik Kemal) (Istanbul, Turkey: Istanbul
Universitesi Edebiyat Fakultesi, 1948); Mithat Cemal
sovereignty, which is charged with the establish¬
ment of right and the suppression of wrong, is that
force that comes into being from the conjunction of
individual forces. Therefore, just as all individuals
have the natural right to exercise their own power,
so too conjoined powers naturally belong to all
individuals as a whole, and consequently in every
society the right to sovereignty belongs to the
public.
A shar‘ [religious law] proof of this claim is the
following legal rule:
Kuntay, Namik Kemal Devrinin Insanlari ve Olaylari
Arasinda (Personalities and Events from the Time of Namik
Kemal), 2 volumes (Istanbul. Turkey; Maarif Matbaasi and
Mill! Egitim Basimevi, 1944-1957); §erif Mardin. The
Genesis of Young Ottoman Thought (Princeton. N.J.:
Princeton University Press, 1962), pp. 283-336; Mustafa
Kemal Ozon, Namik Kemal ve Ibret Gazetesi (Namik Kemal
and the Newspaper “The Moral”) (Istanbul, Turkey: Remzi
Kitabevi, 1938).
144
AND SEEK THEIR COUNSEL IN THE MATTER
145
If the people of a town gathered and appointed
someone as qadi [judge] over themselves to judge
cases arising among them, the judicial activity of this
person could not be valid; judicial authority would
still belong to the qadi appointed by the state because
jurisdiction is a right of the government. But if the
people of a town gathered and pledged allegiance to
someone for the sultanate or caliphate, this person
would [indeed] become sultan or caliph, while the
previous sultan or caliph would retain no authority
whatever, because the imamate is a right of the umma
[the Islamic community].
The public cannot perform the duties attached to
this right for themselves, so the appointment of an
imam [leader] and the establishment of a government
are indispensable. This is obviously nothing other
than society’s delegating the performance of the
aforementioned duties to some of its members. Ac¬
cordingly, monarchs have no right to govern other
than the authorization granted to them by the umma
in the form of allegiance [bay ‘a], and the authoriza¬
tion granted to ministers through appointment by
monarchs. The apt saying in the hadith [tradition of
the Prophet] “the leader of the tribe is its servant”
hints at this. 2
Each umma can delegate command to a greater or
lesser degree, according to its exigencies and ethics.
It is nevertheless one of the basic principles of gov¬
ernance that, “regardless of time, place, and circum¬
stance, state authority should be realized in the way
which will least limit the freedom of the individual.”
For example, no umma would wish to infringe this
principle by such actions as appointing one of its
members permanently as an absolute ruler, or be¬
stowing legislative authority upon a [single] indi¬
vidual. Even if it wishes to do so, it could not right¬
fully proceed, because an individual has no right to
wrong himself, neither does the public have the right
to violate the rights of individuals. Furthermore, since
it is a consequence of natural law that the circum¬
stances of one generation affect the succeeding gen¬
erations, no society can have the authority to choose
a way of acting that would harm those who come
after it.
2. [Traditionally this saying of the Prophet was under¬
stood to commend a willingness on the part of someone in
high office to perform small private services for his inferiors
(as opposed to “pulling rank”). Here Namtk Kemal uses it
rather to present rulership as a public service.—Trans.]
There are two major means to keep the state
within the limits of justice. The first is to emancipate
the fundamental principles of the administration from
the domain of implicit interpretations and to make
them public. The excuses, cavils, and denials that
may emanate from the state would thus be checked.
The second is the method of consultation, which
takes the legislative power out of the hands of the
members of the government.
The state is a moral personality. The making of
laws is tantamount to its will, and the execution [of
laws] is its actions. As long as both of these are held
in the same hands, the actions of the government can
never be saved from the unfettered exercise of will.
Thus the necessity for a council of the umma arises
from this.
Let us glance at the fundamental regulations of our
administration. Today we are in possession of the
Rescript of Giilhane [Ottoman reform program of
1839], the Rescript of Reform [Ottoman decree of
1856 guaranteeing equal rights for members of all
religious communities], and the recently delivered
imperial speech [of 1868, including a liberal critique
of the Ottoman legal system]. Some rules that may be
described as fundamental principles can be deduced
from the general character of these documents by tak¬
ing the real and essential meaning of certain phrases
into consideration. Yet none of these documents has
the clarity and methodical structure to constitute a base
for the administration of a civilized state.
Furthermore, some of these documents contain
limitations denying the freedom of the people, em¬
bodied in such phrases as “without reaching the de¬
gree of freedom,” and in some others many super¬
fluities regarding the details of administration are
found.
Since the rights of man are determined by reason
and tradition, and the present state of affairs of our
civilization is evident, the aforementioned imperial
rescripts and decrees must be corrected by bringing
these two principles into conformity. That is, their
superfluities should be pruned, their obscurities
should be clarified, and the necessary principles
should be formulated—for example, the requisite
freedom for everyone to scrutinize the state and criti¬
cize the actions of the government, either verbally or
through publication, given that sovereignty belongs
to the people. After this, a rescript of fundamental
principles should be issued to ensure that the admin¬
istration of the Ottoman state is indeed based upon
146 Namik Kemal
freedom and justice. The inevitable consequence of
this is the method of consultation, which is the very
object of our discussion.
Let us first consider the truth of this Eastern Ques¬
tion which is so much talked about: As is known,
Russia wants to annihilate the Sublime State [Otto¬
man Empire], while the Western states prevent her
from carrying this out. And yet, while Russia has
been attempting to accomplish her goal by provok¬
ing the Christian subjects of the Sublime State, Eu¬
rope has been helping the complainants whom Rus¬
sia has encouraged to come forward. At first glance,
these actions may appear as a major contradiction.
However, in fact, it is our state that compels the
Europeans to follow this course.
When the Russians sent [Knyaz Aleksandr
Sergeyevich] Menshikov [Russian general, 1787—
1867] to Istanbul [in 1853] to protect their coreli¬
gionists [and the Crimean War broke out], the West¬
ern Powers sacrificed their resources and the lives of
their men along with us in order to resist Russian
intervention. At the end of the conflict, however, they
proposed to us the reformation of our tyrannical ad¬
ministration. At that juncture the Sublime Porte
should have succeeded in preventing all foreign in¬
terventions and securing our future existence by cor¬
recting the fundamentals of the state and obtaining a
collective European guarantee as a constitutional
state. Instead, the Sublime Porte mollified Europe by
granting certain privileges to the Christians alone.
Furthermore, by including these reforms in the Treaty
of Paris, they [Ottoman statesmen] both promised to
reform the conditions of the Christian subjects in the
name of the sultan and granted the [European] guar¬
antor states a right of supervision in this matter.
Now whenever Christians make allegations
against the state, whether true or false, these result
in their acquisition of rights. This is because the fun¬
damentals of the administration are corrupt, the of¬
ficials are not accountable, there is no consultation,
and there is no oversight on the part of the umma.
For these reasons the Europeans do not believe us,
regardless of the magnitude of the privileges granted
to the Christians to whom we have promised reform,
and despite all the talk about their prosperity. And
since the Europeans are accustomed to freedom, they
say, “Could a country that lacks deputies to scruti¬
nize the rules and make the ministers accountable
enjoy order?” and “Can a man be free without being
able to criticize members of the government verbally
or through publication?” Another misfortune is that
when members of the government speak about the
contentedness of the people, Europeans conclude that
the Muslims are ignorant of the pleasure of freedom
and readily submit to the noose of oppression.
What will be the result of all this? The state will
undoubtedly sink if it does not modify its present
absolutism.
It is true that the Western Powers have defended
us up to now, for the sake of protecting their com¬
mercial interests and safeguarding the European bal¬
ance [of power] against the aggression of the north¬
ern savages [Russia]; and in the future they will
continue to do so as much as they can.
Yet given these [Christian] complaints of victim¬
ization, the Western Powers cannot refrain from put¬
ting pressure on us, or at least standing as the pro¬
tector of rebels, because they do not want to leave
Russia alone in its intervention. This is an era in
which nobody can resist public opinion. The claim
that “rule belongs to the victor” 3 cannot be applied
unless concealed behind a thousand curtains of de¬
ceit, even if a clear preponderance exists. In any case,
the idea of granting autonomy to each and every eth¬
nic group in the Ottoman lands and thereby creating
a confederation like Germany has been debated in
Europe for a long time. However, this idea does not
enjoy much currency for now, because those fa¬
mously shrewd European states know that this policy
would be vulnerable to separatism, and there can be
no barrier against Russia as strong as a united Otto¬
man state. In spite of this, every intelligent person
realizes that as long as this tyrannical administration
prevails in the state, foreign interventions cannot be
stopped.
The continuation of foreign intervention (as is
well known, the treasury lost three or four million
purses [1.5 or 2 billion Ottoman piasters] because of
the Crete insurrection alone) will soon reduce the
state to a condition in which it lacks the power to
resist Russian invasion as well as the [Ottoman] al¬
lies could do. Then the Europeans will be compelled
to choose the lesser of two evils [that is, a costly in¬
tervention to defend the Ottomans or a costly accep¬
tance of Russian domination of the region].
No means other than the method of consultation
can be found to dispel these troubles. Then it will be
3. [This saying is generally taken to mean “one judges
by the mainstream, ignoring exceptional cases.”—Trans.]
AND SEEK THEIR COUNSEL IN THE MATTER
147
known that everyone is free. Then Europe will treat
us as a civilized nation, instead of regarding us as a
scarecrow planted against Russia, as is now the case.
Then if the people of a province resort to arms under
the pretext of being oppressed, when they have depu¬
ties in the council of the nation, they will be unable
to justify their claim to Europe. Therefore, almost all
external threats toward the state will be eliminated.
Let us now glance at the internal dimensions of
the matter:
To begin with, even the ministers cannot deny that
today the nation is faced with the threat of extinc¬
tion. One of the major reasons for this is that the
country’s wealth is in sharp decline. Would build¬
ings and other expenses have plunged the treasury
to its present level if we had already adopted the
method of consultation and established an assembly
of the people? Could the internal debt of 22 million
liras have been raised to 40 million through consoli¬
dation? Would [the government] have had the audac¬
ity to declare that the value of the consolidated long¬
term debt was 29 million liras, when it was calculated
as less than 26.5 million [liras]? Would the [tax] regu¬
lations for salt, tobacco, and road construction, whose
thousand harms caused the destruction of so many
regions, have been put into effect? On what basis can
we assume that the future actions of the government
will not conform to its past habits, so long as our
administration maintains its present character? Is it
not a matter of experience that trying what has al¬
ready been tried can only lead to regret?
Second, we should not forget the fact that our
people harbor a deep hatred and mistrust toward the
present administration. Everybody views official
declarations as attempts at disinformation. In fact,
even when the government distributed cotton seed
to the provinces free of charge because of the Ameri¬
can Civil War, some farmers refused to accept it.
When asked the reason for their rejection of this
munificence, they responded: “Nothing good can
come from the state. Who knows what hidden agenda
there may be? We would not dare to accept it.”
And how could people not be mistrustful? A hun¬
dred thousand policies have been put into effect. All
caused harm because the foundations are corrupt.
Many persons who had the confidence of the public
came to occupy high office, but they could not ac¬
complish anything, for the same reason: the rotten¬
ness of the foundations. Is there any possibility that
in the future people will have a warm affection for
the government unless they themselves supervise the
administration? Furthermore, when a while ago the
French emperor used the occasion of the Cretan cri¬
sis to advise the Sublime Porte that it should seek the
public opinion of the people of Turkistan [Turkey]
regarding the necessary reforms, the Sublime Porte
responded by saying: “We cannot commit suicide by
drinking so lethal a poison as public opinion.”
In fact, the opinion of the public is not a poison
but an elixir of health. Just as a physician can only
help individuals regain health with the support of
their organs, so also the administration’s measures
to reform the character of the state, which is a moral
personality, depend upon the assistance of the people
who are the constituent elements of the state. The
only measure that will eliminate the present oppres¬
sion and profligacy, and put an end to the mistrust
of the people, is the adoption of the method of con¬
sultation. In fact, what has been said above proves
this claim.
As for the imagined detrimental effects that would
stem from the adoption of the method of consulta¬
tion, in reality these have no basis. First, it is said that
the establishment of a council of the people would
violate the rights of the sultan. As was made clear in
our introduction, the right of the sultan in our coun¬
try is to govern on the basis of the will of the people
and the principles of freedom. His title is “one
charged with kingship” [sahib al-mulk ], not “owner
of kingship” [malik al-mulk, a title reserved for God
in the Qur’an, Sura 3, Verse 26]. His Imperial Maj¬
esty the sultan is heir to the esteemed Ottoman dy¬
nasty, which established its state by protecting reli¬
gion. It was thanks to this fact that the [Ottoman
sultan] became the cynosure of the people and the
caliph of Islam. The religion of Muhammad rejects
the absolutist claim to outright ownership [of the
state] in the incontrovertible verse: “Whose is the
kingdom today? God’s, the One, the Omnipotent.”
[Qur’an, Sura 40, Verse 16] 4
Second, it is argued that the religious and cultural
heterogeneity of the Ottoman lands and the ignorance
of the people are reasons against this [the adoption of
consultation]. In the gatherings of highly important
personages, it is asked how a people speaking seventy-
two different tongues could be convened in one assem-
4. [Namik Kemal appears to have deliberately omitted a
word— al-yawma —that shows that the verse refers to the Day
of Judgment.—Trans.]
148 Namik Kemal
bly, and what kind of response would be given if [some
of) the deputies to be convened opposed dispatching
troops to Crete because they wished to protect the
Greeks, or raised an objection to appropriations for
holy sites and pious foundations.
O my God! In all provinces there are provincial
councils. Members from all denominations serve in
these councils, and all of them debate issues in the
official language [Turkish]. How can anybody speak
of linguistic heterogeneity in light of this obvious fact?
Is it supposed that a council of the people is a sedi¬
tious assembly whose members are absolutely inde¬
pendent, and whose administration is not based on any
rules? Once the fundamental principles and the inter¬
nal regulations of the assembly are issued, who would
dare to protect those, like the rebels of Crete, who
desire to separate themselves from the integral nation?
Who would dare to say a word about [Islamic] reli¬
gious expenditures [purchasing non-Muslim land], in
return for which [non-Muslim communities] have
acquired real estate valued several times more?
Let us come to the matter of ignorance. Montene¬
gro, Serbia, and Egypt each have councils of the
people. Why should [our people’s] ignorance pre¬
vent us [from having a council], if it did not pre¬
vent these lands? Are we at a lower level of culture
than even the savages of Montenegro? Can it be that
we could not find people to become deputies, whose
only necessary qualification will be attaining the
age of majority, when we can find people in the
provinces to become members of the State Coun¬
cil, membership in which is dependent upon pos¬
sessing perfected political skills?
O Ottoman liberals! Do not give any credit to
such deceptive superstitions. Give serious thought
to the dangerous situation in which the nation finds
itself today. While doing so, take into consideration
the accomplishments that the opposition has already
achieved. It will be obvious that the salvation of the
state today is dependent upon the adoption of the
method of consultation, and upon continuing the op¬
position aimed at achieving this method of admin¬
istration. If we have any love for the nation, let us
be fervent in advancing this meritorious policy. Let
us be fervent so that we can move forward without
delay.
18
§emseddin Sami Frasheri
Transferring the New Civilization
to the Islamic Peoples
Jemseddin Sami Frasheri (Albania-Turkey, 1850-1904) was a leading Ottoman intel¬
lectual, journalist, and linguist. One of seven children in a prominent Albanian family,
he learned European languages at a Greek high school and Middle Eastern languages
from special lessons at Islamic schools. Following graduation, he worked for the gover¬
nor of loannina, and then the press bureau of the Sublime Porte in Istanbul. At the
same time, he published his own articles and plays, which resulted in his banishment
through appointment as editor of the official gazette of Tripoli, in North Africa. The
following year, he was granted an imperial pardon and returned to newspaper work in
Istanbul. Jemseddin Sami was the author of the first modern geographical and histori¬
cal dictionary of the Ottoman Empire, and many other lexicons, He also established a
series called the "Pocket Library” to publish short essays for the general public. It seems
that he suppressed his more radical opinions in these pamphlets—on the Islamic roots
of European civilization, for example, and the veiling of women. Furthermore, his at¬
tempt to translate the Qur'an into Turkish was frustrated by the authorities, and he
was compelled to destroy the parts he had completed. Meanwhile, his newspaper ar¬
ticles—including the one translated here—were outspoken in promoting positivism
and modernization. These publications, along with his participation in Albanian cultural
activities, caused the government to treat Jemseddin Sami as suspect. Although he
was appointed to official positions, he was asked to conduct his studies at home and
lived his last years under virtual house arrest. 1
As may be understood from our previous articles on
[Europe’s] history and state, although civilization
passed through many hands before reaching those of
the Europeans, in comparison to modern-day Euro¬
pean civilization those ancient civilizations—for all
that the later ones were always more perfect than the
earlier—are like mere drawings made on a wall with
coal by a child in comparison to a painting by the
famous artist Raphael [Italy, 1483-1520], In addi¬
tion, those old civilizations have already been de¬
stroyed; dealing with them is a duty reserved to his¬
tory and to the science of archaeology. Many works
Jemseddin Sami Frasheri, “Medeniyet-i cedidenin umem-i
islamiyeye nakli” (Transferring the New Civilization to the
Islamic Peoples), Giine§ (The Sun), Istanbul, Ottoman Em¬
pire, volume 1, number 4, 1883-1884, pp. 179-184. Trans¬
lation from Turkish and introduction by M. Jtikrii Hanioglu.
1. Hikmet Turhan Daglioglu, §emsettin Sami Bey: Hayati
ve Eserleri (jemseddin Sami Bey: His Life and Works)
of Islamic civilization—the latest of the ancient civi¬
lizations—and of its predecessor Greek civilization
are extant, but given the existence of [modem] works
and beacons, whose number is increasing daily, hav¬
ing recourse to these ancient works, or contenting
oneself with them, is tantamount to trying to benefit
from the wick of an oil lamp in the presence of sun¬
light. Thus the scholars and philosophers of present-
day civilization consider Aristotle [Greece, 384-322
b.c.] and Ibn Rushd [Andalusia-Morocco, 1126-
1198] as two great mentors of civilization and hold
them in high esteem; yet in today’s schools they do
not teach Aristotle’s History of Animals or The
(Istanbul. Turkey: Resimli Ay Matbaasi, 1934); Ismail Hakki,
On Dordiincu Asrin Tiirk Muharrirleri: jemseddin Sami Bey
(Turkish Authors of the Fourteenth Century [a.h.]: jemseddin
Sami Bey) (Istanbul, Ottoman Empire: Kasbar Matbaasi,
1895); Agah Sim Levend, §emsettin Sami (jemseddin Sami)
(Ankara, Turkey: Tiirk Dil Kurumu Tamtma Yayinlan. 1969).
149
150 §emseddin Sami Frasheri
Canon of Medicine by Ibn Sina [Iran, 980-1037].
They rendered great services to humanity; they each
lit a lamp in gloomy centuries enveloped in the dark¬
ness of ignorance. Gradually people left this environ¬
ment of darkness, finding the way with the help of
their lamps. At last the sun rose, the light of educa¬
tion flooded the world. The duty we owe to those
lamps today is simply to cherish and respect them for
their role in getting us out the darkness. To go be¬
yond this and to draw a curtain of ignorance and fa¬
naticism in front of the light of the sun, and to con¬
tent ourselves with the weak light of those lamps, is
sheer folly.
Therefore, saving the Muslim peoples from igno¬
rance and once again bringing them to civilization
are among the most important priorities of any zeal¬
ous person who loves his religious community and
fatherland, since the survival and glory of Islam are
contingent upon this alone.
It is true that religious zeal would impel a man to
be content with the lamp which he knows to have
been lit by his ancestors; yet it is essential that rea¬
son and wisdom should overcome any such feeling.
Today, however much effort and expense is required
to revive the medicine of Ibn Sina, the wisdom of Ibn
Rushd, and the chemistry of Jahiz [Iraq, circa 776-
869], to extract their books from underneath the dust
of libraries and translate them into the various Mus¬
lim languages, to publish them, and to found schools
and colleges devoted to teaching them, we must make
the same effort and go to the same expense to put into
circulation among us the best scientific works of our
own century. For just as we cannot cure even malaria
with the medicine of Ibn Sina, so we can neither
operate a railroad engine or steamship, nor use the
telegraph, with the chemistry of Jahiz and the wis¬
dom of Ibn Sina. For this reason, if we wish to be¬
come civilized, we must do so by borrowing science
and technology from the contemporary civilization
of Europe, and leave the study of the works of Islamic
scholars to the students of history and antiquity.
It is a regrettable circumstance that, because today
civilization seems to belong exclusively to the Chris¬
tian nations, ignorant masses of our own nation take
it to be a symbol or requisite of Christianity, and thus
deem distancing themselves from it and guarding
themselves against it to be a religious duty.
We can affirm that it is not the religion of Islam
which prevents Muslim nations from becoming civi¬
lized; rather the cause is the religious difference and
conflict which exists between the Muslim and the
civilized nations—in other words, the fact that
present-day civilization is in the hands of the Chris¬
tian nations.
To avoid such fanatical reactions on the part of
the people, some of our literary figures who are un¬
happy with this situation have attempted to make
European civilization seem less loathsome in the eyes
of the people, and so to make them warm to the new
sciences and pave the way to transfer contemporary
civilization to the Islamic nations. In order to achieve
this goal, they used newspapers, books, pamphlets,
sermons, and all available means to spread the view
that European civilization was borrowed from the
Muslims, that Islam is no obstacle to true civiliza¬
tion, and that most of science and technology which
we see in the hands of the Europeans today is made
up of Muslim discoveries. This effort of these people
is a most worthy one. But because there is as much
exaggeration as truth in what they assert, one senses
that alongside the good they have done, they have
also done some harm. This effort has gone to ex¬
tremes by exceeding the limits of necessity. Just as a
large dose of medicine intended to cure an illness
creates a new one, so a new idea has arisen from this
exaggeration, and although it is less detrimental than
the first, its harmfulness cannot be denied. The num¬
ber of people among the Muslims who view Euro¬
pean civilization as a product of unbelief contrary to
and incompatible with Islam has decreased, thanks
to the efforts of these preachers of civilization. Yet
as a result of their exaggerations, the number of those
people who have acquired a new fanaticism—view¬
ing European civilization as something stolen from
us, imperfect, and an imitation, and insulting that
civilization while maintaining that the true civiliza¬
tion is ours—has correspondingly increased.
This new fanaticism is like an illness arising from
an overzealous physician’s treatment. Shattering this
fanaticism is a most weighty duty for those who want
to be of service in civilizing the Muslim nations. This
duty compels us to say the following to those who have
acquired this new fanaticism: The Europeans bor¬
rowed many things from us, that is to say from our
ancestors or more precisely our coreligionists who
lived eight or ten centuries ago; however, none of the
things in their hands today is something that was bor¬
rowed from our ancestors. Europe borrowed a seed of
civilization from the Islamic world, and planted that
seed. It is natural that a seed should decompose in the
TRANSFERRING THE NEW CIVILIZATION
151
earth in order to bear fruit. That seed decomposed; the
cycle has been repeated many times, with the result
that its very genus has changed. The knowledge that
Europe derived from the scholars of Islam was very
considerable by [the standards of] the time, but by
present-day standards it is nothing. At that time she
borrowed a lamp from us in order to escape from the
darkness of ignorance which surrounded her; but once
she had reached a bright place with the help of the light
of that lamp, she no longer needed it, and threw it
away. Can we wax proud of this? There is nothing here
to be proud of; rather we should be ashamed of it,
because, after dropping this lamp and allowing it to
go out, we do not even desire to benefit from a sun of
civilization which rises and shines before our very
eyes. Some among us say “this is not a sun but a time
just before dawn,” while some of us say “this is an
imitation of our old lamp,” thereby preferring to re¬
main in darkness by closing our eyes!
Had the pioneers of Islamic civilization such as
[caliph Abu] Ja‘far [al-]Mansur [reigned 754-775],
[caliph] Harun al-Rashid [reigned 786-809], and the
caliph Ma’mun [reigned 813-833], who established
the caliphate on the ruins of Babylon, viewed Greek
civilization with similar contempt, maintained that
that civilization was derived from, and a mere imi¬
tation of, the civilization of their ancestors the
Chaldeans, or that depending on works of Greek
pagans contradicted Islam, would the Islamic civili¬
zation of which we are so proud today have materi¬
alized? Although Greek civilization was no longer
an ongoing enterprise at that time, and had ceased to
exist, children of the Companions of the Messenger
of God (may God bless him and grant him salvation)
borrowed it in its entirety, revived it, and held Greek
sages, in whose footsteps they proudly followed, in
high esteem and paid tribute to them. Why then do
we not want to benefit from European civilization,
accusing it sometimes of blasphemy and polytheism
and sometimes of being an imitation? Are the Euro¬
pean people of the book [Christians and Jews] more
profligate in their religion than the ancient Greek
pagans, or are we more pious than the children of the
Companions of the Prophet who had the honor of
conversing with the Messenger of God?
In Europe, too, fanaticism was often an obstacle
on the road to civilization, Islamic scholars were
viewed as sorcerers, and those cultivating the sci¬
ences were accused of heresy and severely punished.
There too at first appeared some scholars who tried
to reconcile religious texts with science, and to elimi¬
nate fanaticism by appeasing it. But because fanati¬
cism is not the sort of monster that can be won over
with kindness, it has brutally destroyed those who
have attempted to appease it. Finally, the intellectu¬
als gathered together, hand in hand, and waged a war
against fanaticism with axes, crowbars, and gunpow¬
der; they demolished it, and only then did civiliza¬
tion begin to move forward. In our society, too, in
order to achieve progress in civilization and save the
Muslim nations from the ignorance and Bedouinism
that are precipitating their annihilation, for all intents
and purposes a war must be declared against fanati¬
cism to crush it by force and thus open the road to
civilization.
Far from damaging religion, this would in fact
greatly benefit it; for fanaticism is the rust of religion,
and just as within a short time rust eats up and destroys
even the best steel, so also fanaticism stains even the
most truthful religion and rots it. The rust of fanati¬
cism must be removed from religion so it shines with
its true and essential luster, and its future is secured.
There is as great a difference between religion and
fanaticism as there is between light and darkness. The
darkness of ignorance and fanaticism must be removed
so that the light of knowledge and true religion may
together illuminate and reinvigorate people’s minds
and hearts. There is no alternative.
19
‘Abd al-Rahman al-Kawakibi
Summary of the Causes of Stagnation
‘Abd al-Rahman al-Kawakibi (Syria, 1854-1902) was one of the most influential Islamic
reformist thinkers in the eastern Mediterranean at the end of the nineteenth century,
Bom into a well-established family of notables in Aleppo, al-Kawakibi received a thor¬
ough education in the Islamic sciences and in the major Islamic languages of the region:
Arabic, Ottoman Turkish, and Persian. In the 1870s, he edited the official paper in Aleppo,
al-Furat (The Euphrates), and established two independent newspapers, both of which
were short-lived. Despite holding a number of administrative and public posts in Otto¬
man Syria, al-Kawakibi experienced chronic persecution by the authorities, leading him
ultimately to settle in Egypt in 1898. He died suddenly in Cairo in 1902, possibly poi¬
soned by agents of the Ottoman sultan. Al-Kawakibi's thought was influenced by his
contemporaries Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (chapter I I) and Muhammad 'Abduh (chap¬
ter 3), among others. His historical significance in the Islamic modernist trend of thought
lay in his elaboration of an Arab pan-lslamism intended to reform the decaying Muslim
world, privileging Arabs over non-Arabs and advocating the establishment of an Arab
caliphate. In this process, al-Kawakibi decentered the primacy of the Ottoman Turks and
transformed them into an internal, problematic other. The following selection is drawn
from al-Kawakibi’s famous account of a fictional senes of meetings in Mecca, at which
twenty-three representatives from around the Muslim world—including thirteen Arabs—
assemble to discuss pan-lslamic resurgence and criticize Ottoman tyranny. 1
The Seventh Gathering, Wednesday,
24 Zi'l-Qa'da 1316 [Apnl 5, 1899]
On the morning of this day, the association as¬
sembled, and the minutes of the preceding [meeting]
were read, in keeping with the rules.
“Mr. President,” [the fictional delegate from
Mecca] said, addressing al-Sayyid al-Furati. 2 “In
addition to your attention to organizing meetings and
fulfilling editorial duties, the association expects also
to benefit from your personal views concerning the
cause of stagnation, which is the topic under discus¬
sion, after summarizing all of the opinions that the
honorable brethren have mentioned, whenever they
have been expressed knowledgably and consistently
in hearing, writing, reading, and reviewing—you are
the most wide-ranging of us, intellectually.
“In addition, the association requests the eminent
Damascene and the eloquent Alexandrian [fictional
representatives from Damascus and Alexandria] to
cooperate in writing down your speech, that is, to take
turns listening to the spoken statements and writing
them down, because, like the rest of the brethren, nei¬
ther of them knows short-hand, which is used in such
situations.”
The eminent Damascene looked at his colleague
[from Alexandria], who indicated his approval, then
said: “We are willing to render this service.”
‘Abd al-Rahman al-Kawakibi, “Umm al-Qura” (The Mother
of Towns [Mecca]), in al-A ‘mal al-kamila lil-Kawakibi ( The
Complete Works of Kawakibi) (Beirut, Lebanon: Markaz
Dirasat al-Wahda al-‘Arabiyya, 1995), pp. 358-367. First
published in 1902. Translation from Arabic and introduction
by Joseph G. Rahme.
1. Joseph G. Rahme, ‘“Abd al-Rahman al-Kawakibi’s
Reformist Ideology, Arab Pan-lslamism, and the Internal
Other,” Journal of Islamic Studies, volume 10, number 2,
1999, pp. 159-177; Eliezer Tauber, The Emergence of the
Arab Movements (London: Frank Cass, 1993), ch. 5; Khaldun
S, al-Husry, Three Reformers: A Study in Modem Arabic
Political Thought (Beirut. Lebanon: Khayats, 1966); ‘Abbas
M. al-‘Aqqad, al-Rahhala Kaf (The Traveler K) (Cairo,
Egypt: Matbu‘at al-Majlis al-‘ATa, 1958).
2. [Al-Sayyid al-Furati—probably the alter ego of the au¬
thor—was the fictional representative of northern Syria, pri¬
marily Aleppo, and parts of northern Iraq.—Trans.]
152
SUMMARY OF THE CAUSES OF STAGNATION
153
Al-Sayyid al-Furati said: “[I shall comply] out of
affection and obedience though I am really incapable,
my speech is feeble, and I have little to offer.” Then he
turned away from the desk, and the eminent Damascene
and eloquent Alexandrian took his place. [Al-Furati]
did not linger and plunged into his speech. He said:
“It can be concluded from our blessed association’s
deliberations that this stagnation, as already discussed,
stems from the totality of numerous causes, not from
one or a few causes that can easily be resisted. Some
of these causes are fundamental, and some are derived
from fundamental [causes]. Yet all of them can be
reduced to three categories: religious causes, political
causes, and moral causes. I will read to you summa¬
ries from the index list that I extracted from the
association’s studies, distinguishing the fundamental
[causes] with the letter F and the derivative [causes]
with the letter D, as follows.”
The First Kind: Religious Causes
1. Effect of the doctrine of predestination on the
ideas of the umma [Muslim community]. (F)
2. Effect of asceticism on effort, work, and beauty
of life. (D)
3. Effect of dissension [arising] from debates
about religious beliefs. (F)
4. Giving oneself over to specious ideas and arti¬
ficial distinctions in religion. (F)
5. The abandonment of religious tolerance and
leniency in religious practice. (F)
6. Religious severity by later legists in contrast to
the pious early Muslims. (F)
7. Confusion of the umma ’s beliefs due to the
plethora of conflicting opinions in the deriva¬
tive details of religious laws. (D)
8. Inability to relate statements to practices in re¬
ligion due to adulteration and severity. (D)
9. Introduction of scriptural borrowings, fables,
and harmful innovations into the religion by
deceitful ‘ulama [religious scholars], (F)
10. Belittling of religion by the exploiters of Sufism,
treating it as entertainment and a game. (D)
11. Corruption of the religion by the obscurantism
of the flatterers, through additions, omissions,
and fanciful interpretations. (D)
12. Introduction of innumerable superstitions into
the public sphere by deceivers and worshipers
of the dead and their shrines. (F)
13. Alienation of Muslim minds [literally, “hearts”]
through the threats of astrologers, geomancers,
of magic and humbug. (D)
14. Deceit of liars and flatterers [who state] that in
religion there are secret matters and that knowl¬
edge is a veil. (F)
15. Belief that the philosophical and rational sci¬
ences are incompatible with religion. (F)
16. Penetration of manifest or hidden polytheism
into the beliefs of the laity. (D)
17. Failure of practicing ‘ulama’ to affirm divine
unity. (D)
18. The surrender to taqlid [imitation of previous
scholars] and the abandonment of reflection and
the quest for guidance. (D)
19. Undue allegiance to madhhabs [schools of law]
and the opinions of recent writers, forsaking scrip¬
tures and the path of the pious early Muslims. (D)
20. Neglecting the wisdom of the community, of the
Friday [prayer], and of the hajj [pilgrimage]
assembly. (F)
21. Obstinacy in denouncing religious freedom in
ignorance of its merits. (D)
22. Requiring what would not be required if one
sought guidance from the Book [the Qur’an]
and the sunna [practice of the Prophet], (D)
23. Burdening Muslims with that which God has
not demanded, and belittling of that which is
commanded. (D)
The Second Kind: Political Causes
24. Policymaking is divorced from power and re¬
sponsibility. (F)
25. Fragmentation of the umma into factions and
political parties. (D)
26. Denial of the umma ’s freedom of speech and
action, and loss of its security and aspirations. (D)
27. Loss of justice and equality of rights among the
umma ’s [social] strata. (D)
28. The leaders’ natural inclination toward deceit¬
ful ‘ulama ’ and ignorant Sufis. (D)
29. Denial of a livelihood and honor to practicing
‘ulama ’ and seekers of knowledge. (F)
30. Honoring knowledge by stipends through which
rulers give preferment to the elite, while delegat¬
ing service in religion to the ignorant. (F)
31. Reversal of the practice of taking property from
the rich and giving it to the poor. (F)
32. Requiring leaders, judges, and religious offi¬
cials [to implement] matters that destroy their
religion. (D)
33. Banishing noble and liberal leaders, and asso¬
ciating with flatterers and the wicked. (F)
34. Coercion and mistreatment of high-minded,
rightly-guided leaders. (D)
154 ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Kawakibi
35. Loss of the power of public opinion through
suppression and division. (D)
36. Foolishness of most leaders and their persis¬
tence in unwise policies. (D)
37. Stubborn and arrogant insistence of most lead¬
ers on despotism. (D)
38. Submersion of leaders in luxury and carnal ap¬
petites, and their avoidance of any kind of glory
other than ostentation and wealth. (D)
39. Restriction of political concern to taxation and
the military. (F)
The Third Kind: Moral Causes
40. Immersion in ignorance and acquiescence to
it. (F)
41. Descent into alienation by those who are suc¬
cessful in religious and worldly affairs. (D)
42. Lingering in apathy as a way of comforting the
self. (D)
43. Loss of mutual counseling and giving free rein
to hatred of God. (F)
44. Dissolution of the bonds of religious responsi¬
bility. (F)
45. Corruption of teaching, sermonizing, orating,
and giving spiritual guidance. (D)
46. Loss of religious and moral education. (F)
47. Loss of the strength of associations and the by¬
product of their continued existence. (F)
48. Loss of collective financial strength because of
the neglect of zakat [alms tax]. (F)
49. Abandoning action because of low expecta¬
tions. (D)
50. Neglecting the demand for general rights, due
to cowardice and fear of disappointment. (D)
51. The dominance of flattery’s fabrications, servil¬
ity, and lowliness. (D)
52. Preference for earning a living in the military
and in government service, rather than indus¬
try. (D)
53. Delusion that religious knowledge is found
among turbans [that is, traditional religious
scholars] and in everything that is recorded
in the Book. (D)
54. Enmity toward the higher sciences because of
the comfort of ignorance and abasement. (F)
55. Estrangement from engagement with and dis¬
cussion of public affairs. (F)
56. Inattention to the avoidance of polytheism and
its evil portents. (F)
Then al-Sayyid al-Furati said: “These summarize
the causes of stagnation that the brethren of the as¬
sociation have set forth, disregarding repetitions, as
one would suppose. Inasmuch as the disorder that
exists in the fundamental administration of Islamic
governments has an important role in producing the
genera] stagnation, I therefore add the following
causes to the ones already discussed by my distin¬
guished brethren, enumerating them by means of the
headings of the problem only. Were I to give de¬
tails and explain them, it would take too long and
we would digress from the aim of our gathering.
“Moreover, the causes that I will mention are the
fundamental origins of the disorder in the current poli¬
cies and administration of the Ottoman empire, this
most powerful state whose affairs concern all Muslims.
It has experienced most of these disorders in the last
60 years, that is, after it rushed to reorganize its affairs
[in the Tanzimat reforms of the mid-19th century]. In
doing so, it damaged its ancient foundations and did
not improve either taqlid nor its blameworthy bida ‘
[innovations], so that its condition deteriorated, espe¬
cially in the last 20 years, during which time two thirds
of the kingdom was lost and the remaining third was
destroyed. Among the factors determining the ruin of
the state was the loss of men and the squandering of
the sultan’s power for the sake of preserving his noble
self and persisting in his autocratic policies.
“As for the rest of the Islamic kingdoms and emir¬
ates, they too share some of these fundamental prob¬
lems. Furthermore, they suffer from other, more
harmful and bitter conditions whose exposition and
thorough examination would take too long. The
causes I wish to discuss in summary form are the
following.”
The Policy and Administration
of the Ottomans
57. Standardization of administrative and penal
laws despite differences in the characteristics of
the empire’s parts and differences in the inhab¬
itants in terms of [their] races and customs. (F)
58. Heterogeneity of juridical laws, and the confu¬
sion of the judiciary in [dealing with] analogous
cases. (F)
59. Adherence to the principle of centralized admin¬
istration despite the distance of certain parts
from the capital; administrative leadership
should reside in those distant parts [so as to
know] the situations and the particular features
of their inhabitants. (D)
SUMMARY OF THE CAUSES OF STAGNATION
155
60. Adhering to the principle that administrative
leadership and governors are never held ac¬
countable for their actions. (D)
61. Administrative confusion resulting from inat¬
tention to the integration of morals with proce¬
dures among ministers, governors, and com¬
manders. The state must select them from
among all the races and nationalities found in
the kingdom in order to satisfy them. (D)
62. Adhering to [the practice of] racial inconsis¬
tencies in the hiring of [government] employ¬
ees, with the aim of complicating understand¬
ing between the employees and the [local]
inhabitants and rendering it impractical for
them to intermix and secure the administration;
this makes agreement upon administrative
policy impossible. (D)
63. Adhering to a policy of customarily giving spe¬
cial authority to certain families—like the
rulership of Mecca and the rulership of the large
tribes of the Hijaz, Iraq, and the Euphrates—
who are incapable of administering them; as a
result, the governor enrages those whom he
rules, and is detested by them; [all this] so that
they will not ally with him against the state. (F)
64. Adhering to the practice of appointing to par¬
ticular positions in certain professions, like the
Shaykh al-Islam [chief religious official] or the
Minister of Defense, people despised by their
colleagues in the ‘ulama ’ or the army, so that
the leader and the led will not agree on any im¬
portant matter. (D)
65. Gross discrimination among various subject
races regarding subsidies and penalties.
66. Carelessness in the selection of [government]
employees and [civil] officials, needlessly em¬
ploying too many of them with the purpose
of sustaining cliques, favorites, and habitual
flatterers.
67. Permissiveness in reward and reproof due to in¬
attention to whether administrative matters are
done well or badly, as if the empire had no master.
68. Inattention to fostering religious requirements,
such as erecting rules that conflict with religious
law, in the absence of some compelling policy
concern, or when there is need, but with no at¬
tention to explaining to the umma and seeking
their indulgence for it, through seeking to con¬
vince them and satisfy their concerns.
69. Loss of the sanctity of religious law and the
force of [secular] laws, by not abiding by and
executing [religious law], and insisting on ad¬
ministration being methodical in name but ar¬
bitrary in practice.
70. Failure to attend to the customs of the inhabit¬
ants, their morals, and their welfare, so as to gain
their affection, not just outward obedience.
71. Obtuseness toward or willful neglect of the
needs of the times, the challenge of events, and
the progress of the inhabitants, due to a of lack
of concern for the future.
72. Suppression of awakened thought in an effort
to forbid its growth, development, and [to sup¬
press] inquiry into administrative activities,
their merits and defects; though the suppression
of natural growth is utterly futile, temptation
and [corrupting] inducements are the result, as
well as hatred toward the administration.
73. Preferential treatment of those base in descent,
in morals, and in education, who hold sway over
free persons and have authority over those who
are their superiors; this neglect of matters by
those who are responsible for them leads nec¬
essarily to the debasing of the administration.
74. Administration of the treasury in a loose man¬
ner, without any supervision; purchasing with¬
out budgeting; extravagance without reprimand;
and damage without any accounting, until the
empire became mortgaged to foreigners with
heavy debts that are being paid with [the loss
of] territory, sovereignty, blood, and rights.
75. Administration of important political and civil¬
ian interests without consultation of the sub¬
jects, and the [government’s] refusal to discuss
them—even though its damage in every act of
omission and commission was well known.
7 6. Administration of property in a centralized man¬
ner, silencing experts who know of its defects,
so as to prevent their divulging what they re¬
ally know, lest the public learn the truth of the
matter. If the public were to learn it would
speak, and if it spoke, it would act, and then
there would be a great uprising.
77. Administration of external affairs through
bootlicking, appeasement, the compromise of
rights, bribery, capitulations, and money; the ad¬
ministration expends all of that on its neighbors
so that they will turn a blind eye to the [country ’ s]
destructive, painful sights, and they will put up
with the rotten stink of their rule. Were it not for
those sights and smells, the neighboring coun¬
tries would have no means to exert pressure,
despite the enmity and hatred that God planted
among them till the Day of Resurrection.
Then al-Sayyid al-Furati said: “Some of these
causes I have mentioned are old maladies inseparable
from the administration of the Ottoman government
156 ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Kawakibi
since its establishment, or for centuries, and some of
them are temporary manifestations that will disappear
with the disappearance of their producers. Perhaps
one could be patient with them, were it not that the
danger has come close—may God forbid it—to the
heart, as was indicated by the president in his first
remarks.”
Then he said: “Connected to these causes are a
few miscellaneous causes that I shall examine after
enumerating them in summary fashion, as follows.”
Miscellaneous Causes
78. Differences in the natures of the subjects and
the shepherds.
79. Heedlessness or negligence in organizing the
matters of daily life.
80. Heedlessness of the need to apportion labor and
time.
81. Heedlessness of [the need to] yield to expertise.
82. Heedlessness of balancing [military] power and
preparedness.
83. Abandoning attention to educating women.
84. Inattention to the fitness of wives [that is, the
development of qualities that make them of suit¬
able status to their husbands].
85. Weakness of character, that is, general apathy.
86. Withdrawal from life and apathy.
“As to the incongruence of morals between the
shepherds and the subjects, it has a great significance.
As is apparent to those who contemplate and scruti¬
nize the histories of nations, the greatest and most
successful kings and conquerors—such as Alexander
[Macedonian king, 336-323 b.c.]; ‘Umar [ibn al-
Khattab, second caliph, 634—644] and Salah al-Din
[Ayyubid sultan, 1169-1193], may God be pleased
with them; Genghis [Khan, Mongol ruler, 1206-
1227], [Mehmed] the Conqueror [Ottoman sultan,
1451-1481], Charles V of Germany [Holy Roman
Emperor, 1519-1558], Peter the Great [Russian tsar,
1696-1725], and [Napoleon] Bonaparte [French con¬
sul and emperor, 1799-1815]—did not accomplish
their great feats except through sincere determina¬
tion. They had a genuine and complete congruence
with their subjects and armies in morals and instincts,
so that they were truly heads to those bodies, not like
a camel’s head on the body of a bull, or the reverse.
It is only this congruence that makes the umma con¬
sider its leader to be its head, so that it gives itself
wholeheartedly, without resentment or [the need for]
coercion. Success can not be had in any other way,
as the wise al-Mutanabbi [classical Arab poet, 915—
965] said: ‘The people exist only through kings; will
Arabs succeed with ‘ajam [non-Arab] kings?’
“There is no disagreement about the fact that one
of the most important maxims of governments is to
adopt the characters of the subjects, and to unite with
them in habits and tastes, even if the habits are not
good in themselves. The least a foreign government
should do is conform to the subjects’ characters, even
if the commitment be temporary, at least until it suc¬
ceeds in attracting them to its language, then to its
morals, then to its nationality, as did the Umayyads
[reigned 661-750], the ‘Abbasids [750-1258], and
the Muwahhidun [Almohads, North African dynasty,
1130-1269], and as the European colonial states
would like to do in the present era. Similarly, all of
the non-Arabs who established states in the Islamic
world, such as the Buyids [Turkish dynasty, 932-
1062], Saljuqs [Turkish dynasty, 1038-1194],
Ayyubids [Kurdish dynasty, 1169-1260], Ghurids
[Afghan dynasty, circa 1149-1215], Circassians
[probably the Mamluk dynasty in Egypt, 1250—
1517], and the descendants of Muhammad ‘ Ali [ruler
of Egypt, 1805-1849, of Albanian-Turkish origin]
acculmrated, so that it was not long until they become
Arabized and molded by the characteristics of the
Arabs. They intermingled with them and became part
of them, just as the Tatar Moghuls [that is, the
Mongols] became Persians and Indians. The only
exception in this regard was the Turkish Moghuls—
that is, the Ottomans,who. on the contrary, take pride
in preserving the otherness of their subjects, so that
they do not seek their Turkification, nor do they agree
to become Arabized; the contemporary ones are be¬
coming Frenchified or Germanified. There is no ra¬
tional cause for such [behavior] except their intense
hatred toward the Arabs, as can be proved by the
proverbs about Arabs that flow from their tongues:
—their use of the phrase ‘ dilenci Arab,’ that is,
‘Arab beggar,’ for Arabs of the Hijaz.
—their use of the phrase ‘ kor fellah ,’ meaning ‘rude
peasant,’ for Egyptians.
—‘Arab £ingenesi,’ that is, ‘Arab Gypsy’; ‘Kibti
Arab,’ that is, ‘Egyptian Gypsy.’
—their saying about the Arabs of Syria: ‘Ne §am 'in
§ekeri ve ne Arab’m yiizti’ that is, ‘It is worth put¬
ting up with the Arabs for the sweets of Damascus.’
SUMMARY OF THE CAUSES OF STAGNATION
157
[Literally: ‘Neither the sweets of Damascus, nor the
face of the Arab.’]
—their use of the term ‘Arab’ for slaves and black
animals.
—their saying, ‘pis Arab,’ that is, ‘filthy Arab.’
—‘Arab akli ,’ that is, ‘Arab mind,’ or small; ‘ Arab
tabiati,’ that is, ‘Arab taste,’ or corrupt; ‘Arab
genesi ,’ that is, ‘Arab jawbone,’ or excessive babble.
—their saying, ‘Bunu yaparsam Arab olayim ’ that
is, ‘If I do that, may I become an Arab.’
—their saying, ‘ Nerde Arab, nerde tambura’ that
is, ‘Where there is an Arab, there is a lute.’
“To all that, the Arabs do not reciprocate, except
with two expressions. The first is the Arab saying
about them: ‘Three were created for oppression and
decay: lice, Turks, and the plague.’ And the second
expression: calling [Turks] ‘Byzantines,’ an indica¬
tion of suspicion about their Islamic faith. The cause
of this suspicion is that the Turks did not serve Islam,
except for the establishment of a few mosques—and
if it were not for their rulers wanting to have their
names mentioned from the pulpits, even these would
not have been established.
“Moreover, they joined Islam in blind obedience
to their grandees, in fear of astrological misfortune,
and in respect for fire-pits, which added greatly to
existing superstitions.”
Then al-Sayyid al-Furati said:
“I beg pardon from al-Maula al-Rumi [the fic¬
tional Turkish delegate], because he knows that I do
not exaggerate, and if it were not for the religious
necessity, of which he is aware, I would not have
spoken so clearly and openly. For [it is said that] the
sincere counselor is the one who makes you weep,
not the one who makes you laugh.”
Mr. President said: “Our brother al-Sayyid al-
Furati is a well-spoken orator and a worldly knight,
and the research to which he pointed deserves much
discussion. But today our time has drawn to a close,
and therefore we adjourn till our appointment tomor¬
row, if the Exalted Master permits.”
20
Mahmud Shukri al-Alusi
Ijtihad and the Refutation of Nabhani
Mahmud Shukri al-Alusi (Iraq, 1857-1924) was the foremost proponent of religious re¬
form in late Ottoman Iraq. A prolific writer, he addressed such controversial religious
issues as independent reasoning ( ijtihad) in Islamic law and innovations in worship. He
also contributed to the reform movement by searching for and publishing the works of
earlier scholars like Ibn Taymiyya (1263-1328). His modernist inclination appears in ar¬
guments for the harmony of modern scientific views, like heliocentrism, with the Qur’an.
Alusi came from a long line of prominent religious scholars, the most famous of whom
was his grandfather, the author of a major exegesis of the Qur’an. After a traditional
religious education, he taught in several Baghdad mosques and seminaries. Around 1890,
he began to criticize popular veneration of saints' tombs and the inclusion of music and
dance in Sufi rituals. In 1902, conservative scholars plotted to remove him from Baghdad
for allegedly spreading Wahhabi ideas, but their effort failed. Alusi gathered a small num¬
ber of religious students who continued to pursue Islamic reform in Iraq. He is also no¬
table for attracting the attention of European scholars. He befriended the great French
Orientalist Louis Massignon (1883-1962), and he won a prize from the Stockholm Ori-
ental Languages Academy for his three-volume history of the pre-lslamic Arabs, This se¬
lection is excerpted from a polemical attack, published anonymously, on a scholar who
objected to ijtihad , After the Ottoman Young Turk Revolution of 1908, his publishers
wrote Alusi’s name by hand on each copy of the book. 1
The time has come for the pen to gallop along the
racecourse of debate, stirring up the dust of contro¬
versy in the face of the most intractable opponent,
who has mounted the steed of obstinacy. I ask God,
the Exalted, not to allow the tip of my pen to descend
into false accusation, but to safeguard me against
wrongdoing and lapses in word and deed, for God is
the Protection and Refuge from all ills. I will achieve
success only through Him; on Him I depend, and to
Him I turn in repentance.
[Yusuf] al-Nabhani [Palestine-Lebanon, 1850—
1932] wrote, “The first section of the introduction,
on the termination of al-ijtihad al-mutlaq [unre¬
stricted or absolute freedom of Islamic legal inter¬
pretation]—a capability claimed, falsely, by the
Wahhabi [scripturalist] group and other ignorant
heretics from various Islamic madhhabs [legal
Mahmud Shukri al-Alusi, Ghayat ai-amani fi’l-radd ‘ala
al-Nabhani (The Utmost Desire, a Refutation of Nabhani)
(Cairo, Egypt: ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Tilimsani, 1907), volume 1,
pp. 44-60. First published in 1903. Translation from Arabic
by Hager El Hadidi, edited by Devin Stewart. Introduction
by David D. Commins.
schools] who admire them.” I made this discussion
into a separate treatise, entitled al-Siham al-sa ’ibah
li-ashab al-da‘awi al-kadhiba [Arrows that Strike
Those Who Make False Claims], After presenting the
prologue of that treatise, [al-Nabhani] continued, “I
hold that the claim of ijtihad in this age—by
[Wahhabis] and others, no matter how learned—is
false. It should be ignored, and should not be relied
upon.” He also stated, “I responded to those who
claim ijtihad in this age in my book Hujjat Allah ‘ala
al-‘alamin [God’s Proof to Mankind ]. I cited on this
issue statements of religious scholars such as the
Imam [leading scholar] [‘Abd al-Wahhab] al-
Sha‘rani [1492-1565], the Imam [Abu’1-‘Abbas] Ibn
Hajar al-Haytami [1504-1567], Imam [‘Abd al-
Ra’uf] al-Munawi [1545-1621], and others, which
1. Muhammad Bahjat al-Athari, Mahmud Shukri al-Alusi
wa-ara'uhu al-lughawiyya (Mahmud Shukri al-Alusi and his
Views on Language) (Cairo, Egypt: Jami'at al-Duwal al-
‘Arabiyya, 1958); Ibrahim Samarra'i, al-Sayyid Mahmud
Shukri al-Alusi wa-bulugh al-'arab (Mahmud Shukri al-Alusi
and the Rise of the Arabs ) (Beirut. Lebanon: al-Mu’assasa al-
Jami'iyya li’l-Dirasat wa’l-Nashr wa'l-Tawzi 1 , 1992).
158
IJTIHAD AND THE REFUTATION OF NABHANI
159
should serve to persuade every person endowed with
common sense and sound understanding.” Then he
said, “As for ijtihad, it is not claimed today except
by those of defective mind and religion, unless it is
through wilaya [here, an outstanding mystic’s spe¬
cial status or closeness to God], as was stated by the
great Shaykh Muhyi al-Din Ibn al-‘Arabi [1165-
1240].” Then he quoted al-Jami‘ al-saghir [The
Small Compendium], by Ibn Hajar, which al-Munawi
also quoted in the beginning of his large commen¬
tary on this book: “[Ibn Hajar] said, ‘When Jalal [al-
Din] al-Suyuti [1445-1505] claimed ijtihad, his con¬
temporaries attacked him and criticized him en
masse. They wrote him a petition presenting a num¬
ber of legal questions on which Shafi‘i jurists had
proposed two different rulings considered equally
valid. They demanded that if he had even the lowest
level of ijtihad —that is, ijtihad al-fatwa [the ability
to select among the legal opinions proposed within
a particular legal school]—then he should explain the
opinion he considered most acceptable in this regard,
and provide the appropriate evidence according to the
rules of ijtihad. Al-Suyuti, however, sent back the
petition without writing any answer, and excused
himself, saying that he was busy with other concerns
that prevented him from looking into the matter.’ Ibn
Hajar said, ‘Contemplate the difficulty of this level,
I mean ijtihad al-fatwa, which is the lowest of all the
levels of ijtihad, and it will become apparent to you
that anyone who claims it—let alone claims unre¬
stricted ijtihad —is addlepated and his thinking dis¬
turbed, like someone who rides blindly and strikes
randomly.’ [Ibn Hajar] said, ‘Even if someone could
conceive mentally of the level of unrestricted ijtihad,
he would be too ashamed before God to claim it for
any person of these times.’ Moreover, [Ibn Hajar]
said, ‘[Taqi al-Din] Ibn al-Salah [al-Shahrazuri,
1181-1245] and his followers stated that [ ijtihad] had
terminated about 300 years before their time, and Ibn
al-Salah was about 300 years ago, since he lived in
the sixth century [a.h., or 12th century a.d.], so as of
today it has been discontinued for 600 years’—that
is, with respect to the era of Ibn Hajar, who lived in
the tenth century. So [ijtihad] has now been discon¬
tinued for about a thousand years, for we are in the
seventeenth year of the fourteenth century [a.h., or
1899-1900 a.d.], the year I [al-Nabhani] wrote the
book Hujjat Allah 'ala al- ‘alamin.”
[Al-Nabhani] said, “Ibn al-Salah cited a scholar
of the Islamic jurisprudence to the effect that, after
the era of [Abu ‘Abd Allah Muhammad] al-Shafi‘i
[767-820], there has not been a mujtahid mustaqil
[independent interpreter of the law].” [Al-Nabhani]
said, “Then Shihab al-Din Ibn Hajar said, ‘If there
has been a longstanding debate among leading schol¬
ars of the legal tradition concerning whether or not
Imam al-Haramayn [the Imam of Mecca and Medina,
that is, AbuT-Ma'ali al-Juwayni, 1028-1085] and
Hujjat al-Islam [the Proof of Islam] [Abu Hamid
Muhammad] al-Ghazzali [1058-1111] are among
those who have produced authoritative variant opin¬
ions [wujuh, singular wajh] within the Shafi'i legal
school, what then might you think about others? In¬
deed, the leading scholars said about [Abu’l-
Mahasin] al-Ruyani [13th century], the author of al-
Bahr [The Sea], that he was not among those who
produced wujuh —this despite [al-Ruyani’s] state¬
ment, “If all of al-Shafi‘i’s texts were lost, I could
dictate them from memory.” If such great scholars
are not qualified for ijtihad al-madhhab [the ability
to interpret within a particular legal school], how then
could those who cannot even understand the greater
part of their expressions correctly allow themselves
to claim a higher level, that of unrestricted ijtihad ?
Glory be to You, O God! This is great slander!”’
Then [al-Nabhani] quoted a number of statements by
scholars corroborating his view that ijtihad had been
discontinued. This senseless jabber continues until
the end of his discussion of this topic, indicating his
ignorance, his bankruptcy of all knowledge, and the
falseness of his claim. To mention all the fallacies
included in his discussion would take a long time,
so instead we will criticize his argument in general,
and not in its details, as follows.
Al-Nabhani's thesis will be addressed according
to the following points:
The First Point
To attribute the call for ijtihad to the Wahhabiyya—
the term [al-Nabhani] uses for those who share the
beliefs of Shaykh Muhammad Ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab
[1703-1787]—is a false accusation, a lie, and a slan¬
der against them. All the people of Najd follow the
school of the Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal [780-855],
may God be pleased with him, adopting his opinions
on the individual points of law and agreeing with him
on theology and articles of faith. Shaykh Muhammad
stated this explicitly in many of his treatises. He did
160 Mahmud Shukri al-Alusi
not claim ijtihad , nor did he call on anybody to adopt
him as an authority. He did, however, enjoin doing
good and forbid doing evil. To associate the people
of Najd and those who follow the surma [the prac¬
tice of the Prophet] with the Shaykh and to consider
them a sect of Muslims apart from the ahl al-sunna
[people of the surma, that is, Sunni Muslims], is an
injustice and an aggression; it is a false and slander¬
ous accusation. Even more odd is that the adjective
designating the Shaykh should be al-Muhammadiyya
[and not al-Wahhabiyya], since ‘Abd al-Wahhab is
Shaykh Muhammad’s father, and it was the Shaykh,
not his father, who supported the articles of faith,
commanding good and forbidding evil, so to call stu¬
dents and supporters of the Shaykh Wahhabiyya is
either plain ignorance or an insult, both of which are
clearly wrong.
The Second Point
The topic of ijtihad has been exhausted, for the schol¬
ars of Islamic jurisprudence have discussed it exten¬
sively, particularly in the book al-Muwafaqat [The
Reconciliations ] by Ibrahim ibn Musa al-Shatibi,
died 1388], Despite that, some relevant issues should
be mentioned here in brief. The scholars have de¬
clared that ijtihad is the utmost exertion of effort on
the part of a jurist in order to arrive at a probable
ruling. [Such cases] involve a mujtahid al-mutlaq
[unrestricted interpreter]. Conditions [permitting
such interpretation] are legal capacity—and not pro¬
bity [that is, the full requirements for someone to act
as an official witness in court cases], which is only
necessary for adoption by others of a mujtahid’ s
verdict in a court case—and aptitude. This aptitude
involves the rational capacity for acquiring necessary-
knowledge of the law as a whole, or knowledge of
the particular case at hand alone, ijtihad being di¬
visible, and mental acuity, an innate, keen under¬
standing of the intended meanings of speech, so that
he might be able to deduce legal rules from evi¬
dence, recognize similar and dissimilar cases, prop¬
erly analyze cause and effect, and recognize valid¬
ity and invalidity. This ability is the foundation of
the legal craft. Stupid or incompetent people are
incapable of ijtihad. [A mujtahid ] must also attain
a mid-level [or higher] expertise in the Arabic lan¬
guage and theology; be learned in the Qur’anic
verses and hadiths [narratives of the Prophet] with
legal content; be familiar with legal issues on which
consensus exists, abrogating and abrogated scriptural
prooftexts, single and multiple chains of transmis¬
sion, the occasions of Revelation, and the condition
of hadith transmitters and texts. [For technical mat¬
ters of hadith science and theology,] it is sufficient for
the mujtahid to rely on the assessments of hadith ex¬
perts and leading theologians. It is preferred that he
be able to search for contradictoiy evidence. The rank
lower than that of absolute or unrestricted mujtahid
is mujtahid restricted to a madhhab, who is able to
derive legal rulings from the texts of his Imam [the
eponymous founder of the school of law to which
he belongs]. Below this is mujtahid al-futya [inter¬
preter restricted to the legal opinions already pro¬
posed within a single school], who becomes thor¬
oughly versed in the law and able to perform tarjih
[demonstrating the preponderance of one alternative
ruling over another]. In addition, the scholars of ju¬
risprudence mentioned numerous issues under this
rubric that we need not relate, then disagreed on
whether it is permissible for an age to be devoid of
a mujtahid. Some held that it is permissible, and
even that it actually occurs. Others held that it is not
permissible, citing as evidence the hadith [of the
Prophet], “A group of my nation will continue sup¬
porting the truth until God’s command arrives”—
that is, the Hour of Judgment. This issue will be
discussed below, God willing.
This is a summary of the jurisprudents’ discus¬
sions of the topic, and you have learned that the con¬
ditions they laid down for ijtihad are not impossible
but may exist in any era. You have also learned from
our summary of their statements that they did not
claim that the gate of ijtihad is closed, nor was this
implied by their argument, nor was it indicated by a
scriptural prooftext from the Qur’an or the sunna, the
references to which we must turn in cases of disagree¬
ment. God, the Exalted, said: “O you who believe,
obey God and the Messenger and those in authority
among you; and if you are at variance over some¬
thing, refer it to God and the Messenger, if you be¬
lieve in God and the Last Day. This is good for you
and the best of settlements.” [Qur’an. Sura 4, Verse
59] The opinion that ijtihad has terminated is not
supported by any evidence; therefore, it should be
dismissed, thrown back in the face of the person who
espouses it, and returned to the one who upholds it.
IJTIHAD AND THE REFUTATION OF NABHANI
161
The Third Point
The hadith expert [Muhammad] Ibn al-Qayyim [al-
Jawziyya, 1292-1350] said, in response to this opin¬
ion [that ijtihad has been terminated]: “ Muqallids
[those who engage in taqlid, or the adoption of an
authority’s opinion without independent proof of its
correctness] have flouted God’s decree and His law
with a false judgment that openly contradicts the
statements of His Messenger, peace be upon him,
thereby emptying the earth of people who uphold
God’s proofs for Him and stating that no scholar has
existed since the early eras of Islam. One group of
[muqallids] said, ‘No jurist has the right to choose
between alternative legal rulings after Abu Hanifa
[circa 699-767] and [his students] Abu Yusuf [Ya'qub
al-Kufi, died 798], Zufar ibn al-Hudhayl [died 775],
Muhammad ibn al-Hasan [al-Shaybani, circa 750-
805], and al-Hasan Ibn Ziyad al-Lu’lu’i [734-819].’
This is the opinion of many Hanafi jurists. Bakr [Abu
al-Fadl ibn Muhammad] ibn ‘Ala’ al-Din al-Qushayri,
the Maliki jurist [died 955], stated that nobody has
been able to choose between legal rulings since the
year a.h. 200 [816 a.d.]. Others have said that nobody
has been able to select rulings after [‘Abd al-Rahman]
al-Awza‘i [707-774], Sufyan al-Thawri [716-778],
Waki‘ ibn al-Jarrah [died circa 812], and ‘Abdullah
ibn al-Mubarak [736-797]. [Another] group said that
nobody could choose rulings after al-ShafTi. The fol¬
lowers of al-Shafi‘i disagreed about whose opinions
should be relied upon among those associated with
him, who could produce a wajh that others of lesser
status could adopt in their judgements and rulings, and
who could not. They divided [legal scholars] into three
levels: a first group who produced wujuh, such as Ibn
Shurayh [possibly Shurayh ibn al-Harith al-Kindi, 7th
century], al-Qaffal [Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn ‘Ali al-
Shashi, died 976], and Abu Hamid [al-Ghazzali, died
1111]; a second group who produced ihtimalat [pref¬
erable variant rulings] but not wujuh, such as Abu’l-
Ma'ali [al-Juwayni]; and a third group who produced
neither wujuh nor ihtimalat, such as Ibn Hamid [ref¬
erence unclear] and others. They also disagreed about
when the gate of ijtihad was closed, upholding many
diverse opinions, none of which has God granted any
authority [a reference to the Qur’an, Sura 12, Verse
40, and Sura 53, Verse 23],
“According to these scholars, the world is devoid
of those who uphold God’s proofs for Him; those
who speak with knowledge have vanished from the
earth. No one is allowed any longer to examine God’s
Scripture [the Qur’an] or the sunna of His Messen¬
ger, peace be upon him, to extract the rulings of the
Sacred Law. No one should rule or give a legal opin¬
ion without considering the statement of the one he
imitates and follows. If the authority agrees with what
is contained in the Qur’an and the sunna, the jurist
gives a verdict or legal opinion accordingly; other¬
wise, he rejects the scriptural evidence and does not
accept it. These opinions [about the closing of the
door of ijtihad ], as you see, have reached the utmost
level of invalidity, falsehood, and contradiction.
They represent the espousal of religious positions
without any basis in knowledge, the rejection of
God’s proofs, and the abandonment of the Qur’an
and the sunna of His Messenger as sources for the
rulings of the Sacred Law. God, however, will en¬
sure the completion of His Light and make manifest
the truth of the saying of His Messenger that the earth
shall never be devoid of those who uphold God’s
proof for Him, that a group among His umma [the
Muslim community] shall remain faithful to the
genuine Truth that He revealed through [the Prophet],
and that every hundred years, He will continue to
send to this umma someone to renew its faith.
“Concerning these invalid opinions, it is sufficient
to object to those who uphold them: If no one is al¬
lowed to choose between rulings after those you have
mentioned, by what right can you choose to adopt
certain scholars as authorities and not others? How
do you forbid a man from choosing positions that
ijtihad leads him to adopt, in agreement with the
Scripture of God and the sunna of His Messenger?
How do you allow yourselves to choose taqlid of a
particular [ mujtahid ], and how do you force the en¬
tire Muslim community to follow him, forbid taqlid
of others, and consider him more acceptable for
taqlid than others? What gives you the right to per¬
form this selection, which is not supported by any
evidence, whether a scriptural prooftext from the
Qur’an or the sunna, an instance of consensus or
legal analogy, or a statement of a companion of the
Prophet, while you forbid selection of what has been
demonstrated in the Scripture, the sunna, and the
statements of the Companions?
“One should also object to this opponent: If, ac¬
cording to you or others, it is not permissible to
choose between rulings after [a.h.] 200, how do you
162 Mahmud Shukri al-Alusi
permit yourself—you who were not bom until sixty
years after the year 200 [apparently a reference to al-
Qushayri]—to select the opinion of Malik [ibn Anas,
710-796, founder of the Maliki madhhab], rather
than those of Companions [of the Prophet] who were
more knowledgeable than he, or jurists from the
major cities who are equal to him, or later jurists?
According to this position, [the Maliki jurists]
Ashhab [died 819], Ibn al-Majishun [died 829], al-
Mutarrif ibn ‘Abdullah [died 835], Asbagh ibn al-
Faraj [died 838], Sahnun ibn Sa‘id [777-855],
Ahmad Ibn al-Mu‘adhdhal [ninth century], and other
jurists of the same rank would have been able to
choose between rulings to until the end of the last
month of the year 200, but when the new moon of
the month of Muharram in the year 201 appeared and
the sun disappeared, on that night [July 30,816] they
would have been prohibited—all of a sudden—from
choosing what they had been free to choose before.
“One should object to the others: Is it not one of
the great catastrophes and wonders of the world that
you grant only the imams you mentioned the capa¬
bility to select rulings, to engage in ijtihad , to express
an opinion about the religion of God on the basis of
personal judgment and analogy, while you deny the
capability of selection and ijtihad to the protectors
of Islam—the most learned of the Muslim commu¬
nity concerning the Scripture of God, the sunna of
His Prophet, and the sayings and legal opinions of
the Companions—such as Ahmad ibn Hanbal, al-
Shafi'i, Ishaq Ibn Rahwayh [circa 778-853],
Muhammad ibn Isma‘il al-Bukhari [810-870],
Dawud ibn ‘ Ali [founder of the Zahiri madhhab, died
884], and their likes, despite their wide knowledge
of the sunna, their ability to distinguish authentic
from inauthentic hadith reports, their efforts to record
the sayings of the Companions and the Successors
[the following generation of Muslims], their precise
examination [of texts], and their ingenious use of
evidence? When those among them who upheld the
validity of legal analogy used this method, their
analogies were the most accurate, the least question¬
able, and the closest to the texts of scripture. [Yet you
refuse to grant them this status,] despite their extreme
piety, the God-given affection of the faithful towards
them, and the tremendous respect accorded to them
by the Muslims, both scholars and the masses.
“Though each group of them argues for the pref¬
erence of the particular [mujtahid\ whom they accept
as an authority on the basis of some type of superi¬
ority—precedence in time, asceticism, piety, acquain¬
tance with teachers and authorities whom later schol¬
ars did not meet, or the vast number and illustrious
status of their followers, unmatched by those of other
scholars—the other groups can argue as much or even
more for their own chosen authority’s superiority on
these points or others. It is also possible to object to
all of these contending groups as follows: This opin¬
ion of yours, in order to hold water—if you insist on
adhering to a contradiction—forces you to leave aside
the opinion of your chosen authority in favor of the
opinions of Companions and Successors who were
earlier, more knowledgeable, more pious, more as¬
cetic, and blessed with more numerous and more il¬
lustrious followers. How can one compare the follow¬
ers of [‘Abdullah] Ibn ‘Abbas [619-686], [‘Abdullah]
Ibn Mas‘ud [died circa 652], Zayd ibn Thabit [died
665] and Mu'adh ibn Jabal [died 627], or the follow¬
ers of ‘Umar [ibn al-Khattab, second caliph, 634-644]
and ‘Ali [ibn Abi Talib, fourth caliph, 656-661], with
followers of later imams in numbers and revered sta¬
tus? What of Abu Hurayra [companion of the Prophet,
died 678], for example, about whom al-Bukhari wrote,
‘Eight hundred men, both Companions and Succes¬
sors, transmitted knowledge from him.’ What of Zayd
ibn Thabit, one of the companions of ‘Abdullah Ibn
‘Abbas? Where among the followers of [later] imams
can one find the likes of [the 7th and 8th century
scholars] ‘Ata’ [ibn Abi Rabah], Tawus [ibn Kaysan],
Mujahid [ibn Jabr al-Makki], Tkrima, ‘Ubayd Allah
ibn ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Utba, and Jabir ibn Zayd? And
where among the followers [of later imams ] can one
find the likes of the two Sa‘ids, [‘Amir ibn Sharahil]
al-Sha‘bi, Masruq, ‘Alqama [al-Kufi], al-Aswad [ibn
Yazid], and Shurayh? Where among the followers [of
later imams ] are the likes of Nafi‘, Salim, al-Qasim
[ibn Muhammad], ‘Urwa [ibn al-Zubayr], Kharija ibn
Zayd, Sulayman ibn Yasar [al-Hilali], and Abu Bakr
ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman [al-Makhzumi]? What made
[later] imams more fortunate with their followers than
these [earlier figures] with their followers? It is true
that the latter enjoyed the status of their era, so per¬
haps their greatness, fame, and elevated status pre¬
vented later scholars from following their example,
as if [the later scholars] had said: ‘These [early Mus¬
lims] were too lofty for us. and we are in no way their
equals.’ They stated this explicitly and testified to it
against themselves, for their status did not allow them
to derive religious learning directly from the Qur'an
and the sunna. They would say: ‘We are not capable
IjTIHAD AND THE REFUTATION OF NABHANI
163
of this, not because of defects in the Qur’an or the
sunna, but because of our own incapacity and defects.
We have therefore made do with [the opinions of]
someone who is more knowledgeable of [the Qur’an
and sunna] than we are.’
“One should object to them: Why do you blame
those who follow the teachings of [the Qur’an and
sunna], make [these scriptural texts] the arbiters of
their disputes, bring their suits to them for a verdict,
and hold up scholars’ statements to them for com¬
parison, accepting statements that agree with [these
sources] and rejecting those that contradict them?
Just because you have not yet reached this bunch of
grapes, why do you deny it to those who have reached
it and tasted its sweetness? Why do you limit that
which God’s bounty, that human reason or imagina¬
tion cannot fathom, has made broad? Even if jurists
live in your era, grow up with you, and have a close
kinship with you, God bestows gifts upon whom He
wishes among his worshipers. God, glory be to Him,
censured those who opposed the prophecy [of
Muhammad] by arguing that He had denied it to
prominent men and town leaders, giving it to some¬
one else of lesser stature, saying: ‘Are they the ones
who dispense the favor of your Lord? It is He who
apportions the means of livelihood among them in
this world, and raises some in position over others,
to make some submissive. The favors of your Lord
are better than what they amass.’ (Sura43, Verse 32)
“The Prophet, peace be upon him, said, ‘My na¬
tion is like rain; one does not know which is better,
its beginning or its end.’ God, glory be to Him, in¬
formed us that the foremost believers (who will re¬
side in Heaven) are ‘a multitude of those of old, and
a few of those of later time.’ (Sura 56, Verses 13—
14) God, glory be to Him, also informed us that
[He] ‘raised among the Meccans a messenger from
amongst them, who recites His revelations to them,
reforms them, and teaches them the Scripture and
the Law, for before him they were clearly in error.’
(Sura 62, Verse 2) He also said, ‘And for others
among them who have not joined them yet. He is
mighty and wise.’ (Sura 62, Verse 3) Then He related,
‘That is the bounty of God, He gives whosoever He
please. God is master of great bounty.’ (Sura 62,
Verse 4)” This ends the statement of the hadith ex¬
pert Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya in his book I‘lam al-
muwaqqi'in [The Notification of Court Clerks].
Ibn Qayyim’s passage makes it perfectly clear that
the statements made by al-Nabhani—following his
deviant predecessors—are evidence of his ignorance
and bankruptcy in the fields of knowledge, in both
their subsidiary topics and their fundamental theo¬
ries, since only one who is more ignorant than the
son of an owl, 2 such as himself, would uphold his
thesis.
The Fourth Point Indicating the Invalidity
of the Ignoramus al-Nabhani’s Thesis
Any knowledge which has no evidence to indicate it
is unacceptable. Ijtihad is not like a prophecy so that
it could be said to have been sealed by so-and-so. As
for prophecy, texts from the Qur’an and the sunna
provide evidence that it has been sealed. God, the
Exalted, said, “Muhammad is not the father of any
man among you, but a messenger of God and the seal
of the prophets.” (Sura 33, Verse 40)
In the Sahih [Collection of Sound Hadiths], al-
Bukhari cites Abu Hurayra, who quotes the Prophet,
peace be upon him, as saying, “I and the prophets
before me are like the following example: A man
builds a fine and beautiful house, except for a single
corner brick. The people walk around it and wonder
at its beauty, but they say, ‘Would that this brick be
put in its place!’ I am that brick, and I am the last of
the Prophets.” The fact that prophecy has been sealed
is also supported by rational proofs such as the per¬
fection of the shari'a [sacred law], its inclusion of
legal rulings for all ages and times, and its miracu¬
lous preservation from change and modification,
while being the most moderate of faiths, without any
exaggeration or shortcoming.
All of this indicates that prophecy ended with the
Seal [Muhammad], peace be upon him. For ijtihad,
however, we have seen no evidence of its termina¬
tion, either in the Book of God or the surma of His
Messenger, peace be upon him, or even in the say¬
ings of the Companions. Rather, we have seen evi¬
dence indicating that the science of shari 'a and its
scholars shall continue until the Hour of Reckoning.
Kumayl ibn Ziyad al-Nakha‘i [died circa 778] said,
“‘Ali ibn Abi Talib, may God be pleased with him,
took my hand and brought me out with him near the
cemetery. When we reached the desert he began to
sigh, then said, ‘O Kumayl ibn Ziyad, people's hearts
2. [In Iraq, the owl is held to be the epitome of igno¬
rance.—Ed.]
164 Mahmud Shukri al-Alusi
are vessels; the best among them are those that are
most capacious. Remember what I am telling you.
There are three types of people: the divine scholar,
the student who learns as a means to salvation, and
the riffraff rabble, who follow anyone who shouts,
bend with every wind, remain impervious to the light
of knowledge, and fail to resort to a solid support.
Knowledge is better than wealth. Knowledge guards
you, but you guard wealth. Knowledge grows the
more you give away’”—or according to another ver¬
sion, “the more you put it into practice”—‘“but
wealth decreases as you spend it. Knowledge is the
ruler and wealth is the one ruled. The love of knowl¬
edge is a creed to adhere to. Knowledge gains for a
scholar obedience during his lifetime and fine praise
after his death, but the effect of wealth disappears
once it is exhausted. The hoarders of money die,
while scholars live on. Here is knowledge! Scholars
shall live on until eternity. Though they themselves
might be lost, their likes shall live on in the hearts
[of humankind]. Look, here! Here is knowledge!’ and
[‘Ali] pointed to his chest. ‘If unworthy bearers be¬
come attracted to it, it may end up in the hands of
people who cannot be trusted. They might use the
tool of religion for worldly gain, trying to gain power
over the Qur’an with His proofs and ascendance
over His worshipers with His blessings, or merely
follow the people of truth, without any insight in their
bosom, so that doubt penetrates their heart at the first
sign of specious challenge, or be bent on the pursuit
of delights, easily driven by lust, or obsessed with
gathering and piling up wealth. Such people are not
ones who call to the faith. They are most like sa’iba
camels. 3 Their knowledge dies with the death of its
bearers. O God! Yes, indeed, the earth will never be
devoid of those who uphold God’s proofs, lest His
proofs and pronouncements come to nought. These
[persons] are few in number, yet their statements are
great in the eyes of God. Through them, God defends
His proofs so that they might convey them to their
peers and plant them in the hearts of people like them¬
selves. Knowledge brings them near the truth of re-
3. [In pre-Islamic Arabia, the term sa'iba [unhindered)
applied to camels accorded an honored status because they
had bom a large number of offspring or as the result of a vow
on the part of the owner. They were allowed to roam, pas¬
ture, and drink freely, and were exempted from most labor.
This and related customs are rejected in the Qur’an. (Sura 5,
Verse 103) Alusi’s point here is that scholars who do not pass
on their knowledge cease to benefit society.—Ed.]
ality, so that they find easy what the affluent find
difficult, and they welcome that which frightens the
ignorant. Their bodies live in this world, while then-
souls ascend to divine heights. These are the repre¬
sentatives of God on earth and the propagators of His
religion. Oh, how I long to meet them! I ask God’s
forgiveness for myself and for you. If you wish, you
may leave.’” This was recounted by Abu Nu’ayrn [al-
Isfahani, 948-1038] in Hilyat al-awliya ’ [The Adorn¬
ment of the Saints] and by other authors. Abu Bakr
al-Khatib [al-Baghdadi, 1002-1071] said, “This is a
fine hadith, one of the best in letter and in spirit.”
Imam Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya has interpreted this
hadith in detail in his book, Miftah dar al-sa ‘ada
[The Key to the Abode of Happiness], where he wrote
about ‘Ali’s statement, “O God. Yes, indeed the earth
shall not be devoid of those who uphold God’s proofs
for Him”: “This is confirmed by the following au¬
thentic hadith of the Prophet, peace be upon him: ‘A
group of my community shall remain steadfast in the
Truth, not affected by their tormentors or detractors.
Until God’s command arrives, they shall remain so.’”
[This hadith] is also confirmed by the report related
by [Abu ‘Isa Muhammad] al-Tirmidhi [died 892],
citing Qutayba, Hammad ibn Yahya al-Abahh, from
Thabit, from Anas [ibn Malik, companion of the
Prophet], who reported, “The Messenger of God,
peace be upon him said: ‘My nation is like rain: one
does not know which is better, its beginning or its
end.’” [Al-Tirmidhi] said: “This is a reliable but
uncommon hadith.” It is related that ‘ Abd al-Rahman
ibn Mahdi [died 813] considered Hammad ibn Yahya
al-Abahh a trustworthy transmitter. He used to say,
“[Hammad] is one of our shaykhs [respected teach¬
ers].” In the same chapter, on the authority of
‘Ammar [ibn Yasir, died 657] and ‘Abdullah ibn
‘Amr [died circa 680] [appears the report]: “If there
were no mujtahid to uphold God’s proofs in the last
[days] of the umma, they would not be described as
having such good qualities.”
Also [the report]: “This nation is the most perfect
of nations, the best nation ever brought to the people.
Its Prophet is the seal of the prophets, and there will
be no prophet after him. God made its scholars to
succeed one another, so that the outstanding features
of the faith might not be erased and its signposts not
vanish. Among the Israelites, prophets continually
succeeded one another, so that they were [always] led
by prophets; the scholars of this nation are like the
prophets of the Israelites.” In another hadith, as well:
IJTIHAD AND THE REFUTATION OF NABHANI
165
“This knowledge will be passed on by the virtuous
and reliable members of each successive generation.”
This hadith shows that Islamic religious knowledge
is immune to the distortions of extremists, the pre¬
tenses of liars, and the misinterpretations of the ig¬
norant. It indicates that knowledge will continue to
be carried through the ages, century after century. In
the collection of sound hadiths of [‘Abd al-Rahman
Ibn] Abi Hatim [circa 854-938], there is a report of
al-Khawlani [Abu Idris or Abu Muslim, died 699 or
682] who said that the Messenger of God, peace be
upon him, said: “God will continue to plant in this
faith seedlings that serve to maintain obedience.”
These seedlings of God are the people of knowledge
and pious works. If the earth were to become devoid
of scholars, it would be devoid of seedlings of God.
We have quoted sufficient material for the purpose
at hand.
We have learned from this [fourth] point the inval¬
idity of the senseless drivel the ignoramus al- Nabhani
included in the introduction to his book. He is far from
knowledge and enlightenment, without intellect or
discernment. We leave this matter up to God.
The Fifth Point
[Al-Nabhani’s] statement—“As for ijtihad, it is not
claimed today except by those of defective minds and
defective faith, unless it be through wilaya, as was
stated by the great Shaykh . . .”—has neither mean¬
ing nor effect. We have already noted that it is not
possible for an era to be devoid of a mujtahid, as
Hanbali and traditionalist scholars of Islamic juris¬
prudence have stated. Why do those who fulfil the
conditions for ijtihad, who are prepared to derive
their religion [directly] from the Scripture and surma,
have defective minds and defective faith? Is this not
but the statement of an ignorant person who has been
struck by the touch of Satan? Then, what is the mean¬
ing of his statement: “unless it be through wilaya ”?
Have any religious scholars, experts in jurisprudence
or the points of law, ever considered this term part
of the topic of ijtihadl But it is no wonder that such
ranting come from an ignorant heretic like al-
Nabhani. Indeed, the ignorant injure themselves more
than their enemies do. In addition, the Shaykh Muhyi
al-Din [Ibn al-‘Arabi] is among those who claimed
ijtihad al-mutlaq, as the texts of his books indicate.
He said in one of his poems:
They claim that I follow Ibn Hazm [994-1064],
but I am not among those who say, “Thus
spoke Ibn Hazm,”
Or anybody else. Rather, my words are, “The
text of the Scripture avers.” That is my
judgment.
Or, “The Prophet says,” or “The scholars have
agreed unanimously on the opinion I
profess.” That is my knowledge.
Muhyi al-Din, God’s mercy be upon him, indi¬
cated in these verses that he deduces legal rulings
from the Scripture, surma , and consensus; according
to him, these three alone are the sources of the law,
and not legal analogy. This point will be treated ex¬
haustively in the appropriate place below.
The Sixth Point
[Al-Nabhani] quoted Ibn Hajar al-Makki as saying,
“When Jalal [al-Din] al-Suyuti [ 1445-1505] claimed
ijtihad, his contemporaries attacked him and criti¬
cized him en masse. They wrote him a petition pre¬
senting a number of legal questions on which Shafi’i
jurists have considered two disparate rulings equally
valid. They demanded that if he had even the lowest
level of ijtihad —that is, ijtihad al-fatwa [the right to
choose from among alternative legal opinions]—then
he should explain the opinion he considered most
acceptable in this regard, and provide the appropri¬
ate evidence according to the rules of ijtihad. Al-
Suyuti, however, sent back the petition without writ¬
ing any answer, and excused himself, saying that he
was busy with work that prevented him from look¬
ing into this matter.”
I respond that even if Ibn Hajar related the text of
the quotation accurately, he is not trustworthy, for
he fabricated even greater lies than this against the
Shaykh al-Islam [IbnTaymiyya, 1263-1328], and his
lies are apparent, as will be seen in what follows. The
response in defense of Imam al-Suyuti, mercy be
upon him, is that the mujtahid need not have all the
knowledge contained in the Preserved Tablet.
It is said that Imam Malik was asked 40 questions
and said in response to 36 of them, “I don't know.”
This has been transmitted by the Imam Abu Hanifa
and others. .. and not even a little of His knowl¬
edge can they grasp, except what He will.” (Sura 2,
Verse 255)
66 Mahmud Shukri al-Alusi
The Seventh Point
As for Ibn Hajar’s statement—‘“Ibn al-Salah and his
followers stated that [ ijtihad] had terminated about
300 years earlier, and Ibn al-Salah was about 300
years ago, since he lived in the sixth century' [a.h.,
or 12th century a.d.], so, as of today, it has been dis¬
continued for 600 years'—that is, in relation to the
time of Ibn Hajar . .—my response is: This state¬
ment is beneath consideration on account of the ar¬
guments of the hadith expert Ibn al-Qayyim we have
presented in the third section above and the texts and
evidence of the falseness of this statement that we
included there. Ibn Hajar’s argument shifts, however,
and his statements are inconsistent. He states here
that ijtihad had been discontinued 600 years before
his era, whereas he wrote in his book al-Jawhar al-
munazzam (Strung Jewels) in the course of insulting
Shaykh al-lslam Ibn Taymiyya:
The Shaykh al-lslam Taqi [al-Din] al-Subki [1284—
1355, a critic of Ibn Taymiyya], the great scholar of
mankind, whose brilliance and ijtihad as well as
righteousness and scholarly excellence are generally
acknowledged, may God bless his soul and brighten
his tomb, undertook to refute [Ibn Taymiyya] in an
independent work in which he presented valuable
and excellent arguments, precisely and clearly
setting forth the correct approach through brilliant
proofs. May God thank him for his effort, and
continue to shower him with divine mercy and favor.
See how Ibn Hajar claims a consensus here on the
ijtihad of al-Subki, because he follows the same he¬
retical and whimsical approach and method, but then
cannot bring himself to admit the ijtihad of one
whose lofty status neither al-Subki himself nor his
teachers could even approach. I am referring to
Abu’1-'Abbas Taqi al-Din Ibn Taymiyya, may God
the Exalted have mercy upon him. In al-Jawhar al-
munazzam, in addition to the preceding statements,
[Ibn Hajar] said: “The outrageous statements Ibn
Taymiyya made—even though they were a horren¬
dous offense whose sinful effect will never be un¬
done, and a calamity whose misfortune will reflect
on him until the end of time—are not surprising com¬
ing from him, for he let himself be so seduced by his
whims, desires, and demons that he saw fit to attack
the great mujtahids. The poor man did not realize that
he was committing the foulest of sins.” [Ibn Hajar’s
text] continues in this manner, making it apparent to
any impartial judge that Ibn Hajar followed his
whims and chose the path of error. May God treat him
with His justice.
The point here is that the words of fanatics such as
these, because they speak according to their whims,
cannot be used in valid arguments. They do not ad¬
here to the evidence, but follow the worst of paths. The
argument of the heedless al-Nabhani has crumbled and
cannot be granted any serious consideration.
The Eighth Point Indicating the Invalidity
of the Ignoramus al-Nabhani’s Thesis
Each of the imams has stated that if a hadith is sound,
it must be followed and its purport must be accepted.
That is why many of the imams have stated that one
must accept the sound hadith and forsake all state¬
ments by mujtahids that contradict it. In the book
Flam al-muwaqqi‘in, [Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya
states], “The four imams [the founders of the four
primary Sunni madhhabs] forbade the blind adoption
of their own opinions and sharply censured adher¬
ence to their statements without proof. Al-ShafTi said
that he who seeks knowledge without proof is like
someone who gathers firewood at night: he might,
without realizing it, pick up a bundle of fire wood
with a snake in it and so get bitten. [This statement]
is cited by [Ahmad ibn al-HusaynJ al-Bayhaqi [994-
1066].” Isma'il ibn Yahya al-Muzani [791-878] said
at the beginning of his Mukhtasar [The Abridge¬
ment], “I have summarized this from the teachings
of al-Shafi‘i and the gist of his statements in order
to make them more accessible to the interested stu¬
dent, but at the same time I would have him know
that al-Shafi‘i prohibited the blind adoption of his
own opinions or those of others. Therefore, may [the
student] examine [al-Shafi‘i’s teachings] for the sake
of his faith and exercise caution for the sake of his
soul.” Abu Da’ud [al-Sijistani. circa 817-889] said,
“I asked Ahmad [ibn Hanbal], ‘Is al-Awza’i more
deserving of being followed, or Malik?’ He said,
‘Don’t imitate either of them for your faith. Adhere
to what has come down from the Prophet, peace be
upon him, and the Companions. After these, one is
free to accept or reject the opinions of the Succes¬
sors [the generation after the Companions].’” Ahmad
differentiated between taqlid and ittiba ‘ [critical ac¬
ceptance]. Abu Da’ud said, “I heard [Ahmad ibn
Hanbal] say that ittiba ‘ means following what has
come down from the Prophet, peace be upon him, and
IJTIHAD AND THE REFUTATION OF NABHANI
167
from his Companions. After that, one is free to ac¬
cept or reject the opinions of the Successors.” [Ibn
Hanbal] also said, “Don’t imitate me, and don’t imi¬
tate Malik, al-Thawri, or al-Awza‘i. Rather, draw
from the sources that they draw from.” [Ahmad ibn
Hanbal] said, “It is a sign of limited understanding
that a man base his exercise of religion on taqlid.”
Bishr ibn al-Walid [8th century] reported that Abu
Yusuf said, “Nobody is allowed to adopt our opin¬
ion until he knows the evidence on which it is based.”
Malik stated explicitly that anyone who abandoned
the words of ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab for the words of
Ibrahim al-Nakha‘i [666-715, a generation later]
needs to repent, so what about those who abandon
the words of God and His Messenger for the words
of one like Ibrahim, or one lesser than he?! Ja'far al-
Firyabi said: "Ahmad ibn Ibrahim al-Dawraqi told
me that al-Haytham ibn Jamil told him: ‘I said to
Malik ibn Anas, “O Abu ‘Abdullah! People among
us have written books, and one of them, having writ¬
ten that someone related such-and-such, citing ‘Umar
ibn al-Khattab, and someone else related such-and-
such, citing Ibrahim [al-Nakha‘i], then adopted the
words of Ibrahim.” Malik inquired, “Did they con¬
sider the words of ‘Umar to be authentic?” I replied,
“It was a transmission as reliable as that from
Ibrahim.” Then Malik stated, “These [people] should
be asked to repent.’””
The Ninth Point
The dim-witted al-Nabhani’s opinion implies that the
statements of one who is accepted as an authority
today are to be given more weight than authentic
prophetic hadiths that contradict the opinions of the
mujtahid , and this is the essence of error. I have heard
a Turkish judge say: “If I were to see a text in Munyat
al-musalli [The Wish of the Worshipper, a Hanafi
legal text by Sadid al-Din Kashghari, 13th century],
and a hadith in Imam al-Bukhari’s al-Sahih that con¬
tradicts this text, I would accept what is in the Munyat
and leave aside the hadith from al-Sahih and not rule
by it.” Just look at this stupidity and tremendous
ignorance.
Shaykh al-Islam Abu’l-‘Abbas Taqi al-Din Ibn
Taymiyya, may God bless his pure soul, was asked
about a man who studied law according to one of the
madhhabs and became accomplished in it, but then
studied hadith at a later time and found authentic
hadiths, not abrogated, restricted, or contradicted by
any known scriptural text, which went against ele¬
ments of his madhhab. Should he practice accord¬
ing to the madhhab or practice according to the
hadiths that contradict his madhhab ?
[Ibn Taymiyya] answered: “Praise be to God,
Lord of the worlds. It has been established in the
Qur’an, sunna, and consensus that God, the Exalted,
made obedience to Him and His Messenger, peace
be upon him, a religious duty for His worshipers. He
did not require this nation’s obedience to any particu¬
lar person, in everything he commanded and forbade,
except His Messenger, peace be upon him. Thus
Siddiq al-Umma [The Truthful One of the Nation,
Abu Bakr, first caliph, 632-634], the best [of the
Muslim community] after its Prophet, peace be upon
him, said: ‘Obey me as long as I obey God, the Ex¬
alted, for if I disobey God, the Mighty and Sublime,
you owe me no obedience.’ All [of the four imams]
agreed that no one is infallible, in all of what he com¬
mands and forbids, except God’s Messenger, peace
be upon him. That is why several of the [four] imams
instructed [people] to pick and choose from the
speech of anyone except for the Messenger of God,
peace be upon him [who must be obeyed]. These four
imams, mercy be upon them all, warned people not
to adopt all of their own statements blindly, as was
their duty. Imam Abu Hanifa said, ‘This is my opin¬
ion. It is the best I can do, and if someone comes up
with a better opinion, we will accept it.’ That is why,
when Abu Yusuf, the most learned of Abu Hanifa’s
disciples, met with the imam of Dar al-Hijra
[Medina], Malik ibn Anas, and asked him about the
sa ‘ measure, alms to be paid for vegetables, and vari¬
ous species [a debate raged over which sorts of pro¬
duce were subject to alms-giving requirements],
Malik, God’s mercy be upon him, informed him what
was indicated in the sunna concerning these [mat¬
ters], and [Abu Yusuf] responded, ‘I cede to your
judgment, O Abu ‘Abdullah, and had my master
[Abu Hanifa] seen what I have, he would have ceded
likewise.’ Malik, God’s mercy be upon him, used to
say, ‘I am only human. I am sometimes correct and
sometimes wrong. You must compare my statements
with the Qur’an and sunna,' or words to this effect.
Al-Shafi‘i, God’s mercy be upon him, used to say,
‘It is limiting to a man’s knowledge to adopt the
opinions of other men regarding matters of his faith.'
He also said, ‘Don’t adopt your faith from men, for
they are bound to make mistakes. ’ Established reports
168 Mahmud Shukri al-Alusi
relate that the Prophet, peace be upon him, said,
‘When God wishes somebody well, He makes him
knowledgeable in matters of religion.’ Implicit in this
statement is that those whom God, the Mighty and
Sublime, does not make knowledgeable in matters of
religion are not wished well by Him, so that the ac¬
quisition knowledge of religion is a religious duty.
To acquire knowledge of religion means to know the
rulings of the shari‘a through the appropriate scrip¬
tural evidence. Those who do not know this do not
have knowledge of religion.
“Some people, however, might be incapable of
acquiring knowledge of religion; they are only re¬
quired to do what they can. Some say that anybody
capable of using evidence to establish proof is abso¬
lutely prohibited from taqlid. Others say that taqlid is
allowed without restriction. Still others say that taqlid
is allowed only when necessary, such as when the time
allowed for producing such a proof is limited—this is
the most correct of these opinions, God willing. Ijtihad
is not a monolithic capability, but may be parceled and
divided. A man might be a mujtahid in one particular
field, topic, or issue, but not in another field, topic, or
issue. Each person’s ijtihad varies according to his
ability. If someone examines an issue that has been
disputed by scholars and finds scriptural prooftexts
that appear to corroborate one of the disputed opin¬
ions and are not contradicted by any other known texts,
he is faced with two options. First, he might follow
the opinion of the later jurist, just because he is the
imam of the madhhab in which he studied law—but
this is not a legitimate legal proof, only a mere con¬
vention contradicted by the conventions of others
who have studied in the madhhabs of other imams.
Second, he may follow the opinion that seems more
likely to him, in view of the texts that indicate it. In
this case, his agreement with one imam implies tak¬
ing issue with another, but the prophetic texts remain
protected from violation in practice—and this is the
more correct option.
“We have made this partial concession only be¬
cause someone might object that the speculative abil¬
ity of this particular person might be limited and his
ijtihad regarding this issue might be incomplete. If,
however, he were capable of complete ijtihad , such
that there would not exist any evidence on the side
of the opposing opinion sufficient to reject the scrip¬
tural text, then such a person would be required to
follow that text. If he did otherwise, he would be
following speculation and the dictates of whim, and
would be most disobedient toward God, the Exalted,
and His Messenger.
“His situation would be completely different from
that of someone who claims that the opposing opin¬
ion is supported by proof which carries more weight
than the scriptural text, but says that he does not know
what that proof is. To this person, one should respond
that God, the Exalted, said, ‘So fear God as much as
you can.’ (Sura 64, Verse 16) Your best attempt, in
terms of knowledge and understanding of the law,
indicates that the first opinion is more likely, so you
must follow it. If you later find that the text is con¬
tradicted by more convincing evidence, your situa¬
tion would then be like that of the independent
mujtahid when his ijtihad changes. To change from
one opinion to another because of some truth which
becomes apparent is praiseworthy. This is to be dis¬
tinguished from insisting on an opinion unsupported
by any proof, shying away from an opinion that has
been proved clearly, or shifting from one opinion to
another simply out of custom or whim—such acts are
reprehensible. When a muqallid [person engaging in
taqlid] has heard a hadith and then abandoned it—
especially if it was narrated by a person with a record
of probity—such a case, if it indeed occurs, is not an
excuse to abandon the scriptural text. Our writings
in defense of the distinguished imams have demon¬
strated that they had some twenty reasons for aban¬
doning practice according to certain hadiths. We
have shown that they were justified in their rejection
of certain hadiths for these reasons. We, too, are jus¬
tified in rejecting these hadiths for these same rea¬
sons. However, if one person rejects a hadith in the
belief that it is not authentic, that its transmission is
anonymous, or some such reason, but another per¬
son knows at the same time that this hadith is authen¬
tic and that its transmitter is trustworthy, then the
reasons of the first person are invalid with respect to
the second person. Whoever abandons a hadith on
the grounds that the clear meaning of the Qur’an, or
legal analogy, or the practice of some of the Ansar
[early Muslims of Medina] contradicts it—and at the
same time, it becomes apparent to another person that
the clear meaning of the Qur’an does not contradict
it, and that the text of a sound hadith has priority over
the unambiguous texts of the Qur'an, legal analogy,
and the deeds [of the Ansar]—then the first person’s
reason [for rejecting the hadith ] no longer holds with
respect to the second person. Legal understandings
occur to people’s minds or remain hidden to them in
IJTIHAD AND THE REFUTATION OF NABHANI
169
a process we cannot entirely fathom. This is espe¬
cially the case if someone abandons a hadith because
he believes that its use was abandoned by the
Muhajirun [early Muslims who fled from Mecca to
Medina] and the Ansar—the people of Medina and
others—who are said not to have abandoned a hadith
unless they believed it to have been abrogated or
contradicted by a preferable [hadith], but later hears
that the Muhajirun and Ansar did not in fact aban¬
don this hadith, that some of them, or some Muslims
who heard it from them, practiced in accordance with
it, or other such reasons which render invalid the
evidence that contradicts the scriptural text.
“Suppose someone were to challenge this peti¬
tioner who is seeking guidance [to whose question
Ibn Taymiyya is responding], asking, ‘Are you more
knowledgeable or is the Imam so-and-so?’ This
would be a corrupt comparison, because Imam so-
and-so has been contradicted on this issue by his
equals among the other imams. You are not more
knowledgeable than this or that imam. In relation to
each other, the various imams are like [the Compan¬
ions of the Prophet] Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman [died
656], ‘ Ali, Ibn Mas'ud, Uhayy [ibn Ka‘b, died circa
652], Mu‘adh, similar prominent figures, and others.
These Companions were equal to one another in de¬
bate. If they were at odds about something, they de¬
ferred the question to God and His Messenger, even
though some of them were perhaps more knowledge¬
able than others in certain areas. Debate among [later]
imams is similar.
“People abandoned the statements of ‘Umar and
Ibn Mas‘ud, may God be pleased with them, regard¬
ing the performance of tayammum [performing ritual
ablutions with sand or dry ground when water is not
available] on the part of someone with a major ritual
impurity, and adopted the statements of Abu Musa
al-Ash‘ari [died 662] and others because of the evi¬
dence from the Qur’an and sunna they cited. They
abandoned the statements of ‘Umar regarding the
blood money due for the loss of fingers or toes, adopt¬
ing instead the statement of Mu'awiyya ibn Abi
Sufyan [caliph, 661-680], because of the statements
he transmitted from the Prophet, peace be upon him,
saying, ‘This and that are equivalent.’ A certain per¬
son, arguing with Ibn ‘Abbas about temporary mar¬
riage, said to him, ‘Abu Bakr said [such-and-such]
and ‘Umar said [such-and-such]!’ So Ibn ‘Abbas
said, ‘Stones are about to rain down on you from the
sky! I tell you that the Messenger, peace be upon him,
said [one thing], and you tell me that Abu Bakr and
‘Umar said [something else]!’ When [Ibn ‘Abbas]
was asked about [temporary marriage], he declared
it permissible. His interlocutors objected, presenting
as contradictory evidence the statement of ‘Umar, so
he showed that ‘Umar had not intended what they
claimed. But they pressed him, so he remonstrated:
‘Who has more right to be followed, the Messenger
of God, peace be upon him, or ‘Umar?’ The people
[tend to forget this,] despite their awareness that Abu
Bakr and ‘Umar are more knowledgeable than Ibn
‘Umar [‘Umar’s son] and Ibn ‘Abbas, may God, the
Exalted, be pleased with them. If this gate is opened
[to adopting later imams as ultimate authorities], it
would be necessary to turn away from the command¬
ments of God, the Exalted, and His Messenger, peace
be upon him. Each imam would have the same sta¬
tus among his followers as a prophet among his
people, and this would alter the religion. This is simi¬
lar to what God, the Exalted, faults the Christians
with in His words, ‘They consider their rabbis and
monks and Christ, son of Mary, to be gods apart from
God, even though they had been enjoined to worship
only one God, for there is no god but He. Too holy
is He for what they ascribe to Him!’ (Sura 9, Verse
31) God, glory be to Him, knows best.”
The Tenth Point
One understands from the words of the dim-witted
al-Nabhani that for the last thousand years Muslims,
east and west, have had to adopt the opinions of one
of the four mujtahids, and that anyone deriving his
faith from the Qur’an and sunna, or adopting the
opinions of others—such as a Companion or some
other figure—has departed from the path of correct¬
ness and followed a way other than that of believ¬
ers. This is one of the implications of his false words
and worthless statements. It is to be rejected, and no
scholar of recognized learning has ever professed it.
From the book 1‘lam al-muwaqqi ‘in, by the hadith
expert Ibn al-Qayyim, mercy be upon him: “Must the
person seeking a/oftva engage in [a type of] ijtihad
in order to choose the right mufti for consultation,
appealing only to the one he estimates is most knowl¬
edgeable and most pious—or not? Concerning this
issue, there are two schools of thought, as we have
already discussed: the correct opinion is that he ought
to, because everyone is commanded to fear God as
170 Mahmud Shukri al-Alusi
much as one can.” [Ibn al-Qayyim] states: “When
two muftis differ over an issue, and one is more pious
while the other is more knowledgeable, which one
should be followed? There are three approaches to
this issue, which have been presented above. Is the
layperson obliged to follow one of the well-known
madhhabs or not? There are two opinions on this
issue. One is that [the layperson] is not obliged—and
this is the correct and undeniable opinion. This is
because there are no religious duties except what God
and His Messenger have imposed, and God and His
Messenger have not obliged anybody to follow the
madhhab of an ordinary man, adopting as his faith
this man’s opinion and no one else’s. The noble
[early] centuries of Islam and the early generations
of Muslims came and went entirely free of such prac¬
tices. Moreover, a madhhab is not appropriate for
laypeople. Even if they follow one, they ought not
to, because only those who possess the means of ra¬
tional inquiry and deductive reasoning and are versed
in the various madhhabs on account of this ability,
or those who have read a book on the points of law
according to this madhhab and have learned the legal
opinions and statements of its imam , are entitled to
claim a madhhab. Someone who is not qualified for
this at all, but nevertheless says, ‘I am a ShafiT or
‘I am a Hanbali,’ and so on, does not become so by
his mere utterance of such a statement. It is as if he
had claimed to be a jurist, a grammarian, or a pro¬
fessional secretary: one does not become such things
just by saying so. This is clarified by noting that one
who says he is a Shaffi, a Maliki, or a Hanafi claims
that he follows this imam and adopts his path, which
can only be true if he takes after [the imam ] in knowl¬
edge, learning, and deductive reasoning. With his
ignorance and the extreme disparity between him and
the imam in behavior, knowledge, and scholarly
method, how can he properly claim to be related to
him except through an empty claim, a statement de¬
void of all meaning? It is not imaginable that a lay¬
man can properly have a madhhab. Even if it were
possible, neither he nor anyone else would be under
the obligation to follow the madhhab of an ordinary
man, such that he would have to accept all of his
opinions and reject the opinions of all others. This
disgraceful heresy has recently befallen the Muslim
community; none of the leading scholars of Islam has
ever professed this opinion, for they are higher in
degree, more distinguished in status, and more
knowledgeable of God and His Messenger than to
impose such an obligation on the people. More out¬
landish than this is the opinion of those who state that
one is obliged to follow the madhhab of a particular
scholar, and even more outlandish is the opinion of
those who state that one is obliged to adopt one of
the four madhhabs.
“O God, how astonishing! The madhhabs of the
Companions of the Messenger of God, peace be upon
him, and the madhhabs of the Successors and their
successors, and all the imams of Islam, have died and
altogether ceased to exist, except for the madhhabs
of four souls from among all the leading scholars and
jurists. Has any of the leading scholars ever held this
opinion, or called for it? Does a single word of their
statements indicate it?!
“The obligations imposed by God, the Exalted,
and His Messenger upon the Companions, the Suc¬
cessors, and their successors are the same obligations
imposed on all who succeed them until the Day of
Resurrection. Religious duty does not differ or
change, though it might differ in terms of execution
or amount according to variations in ability, time,
place, and circumstance—but this is also inherent in
the obligations imposed by God, the Exalted, and His
Messenger. Those who consider that a layperson can
have a madhhab say: ‘He believes that this madhhab
he has adopted is the truth, so he must fulfill the
obligations of his belief.’ If what they say is correct,
then it would be prohibited for him to petition legal
scholars outside his adopted madhhab. to follow the
madhhab of an imam comparable, or even preferable,
to his own, or other untenable implications of evi¬
dent invalidity that indicate the invalidity of the
premise on which they are based. Indeed, these ideas
would require that, when faced with a text by the
Messenger of God, peace be upon him, or a statement
by the [first] four caliphs that contradicts his imam,
such a person be required to reject the text or the
statements of the Companions, and give precedence
over them to the opinion of the imam he follows. On
the contrary, the true position is that he may petition
a legal opinion from any of the followers of the
imams or others that he wishes and that he is not
obliged by the consensus of the Muslim community,
nor is the mufti, to limit himself to the positions of
one of the four imams. Moreover, the scholar should
not be limited to the hadith transmitted by the people
of his region or any other region. If a hadith is sound,
he should follow it, whether it be Hijazi, Iraqi, Syr¬
ian, Egyptian, or Yemeni. In addition, by consensus
of the Muslims, one is not obliged to limit oneself to
the seven well-known variant readings of the Qur’an,
but if the reading one adopts matches the unpointed
text of the Uthmanic codex, is correct in terms of
Arabic grammar and usage, and has a sound chain
of authority, one may read and pray according to it,
by consensus. Even if one reads a version which
departs from that of the Uthmanic codex, but which
the Messenger of God, peace be upon him, and the
Companions after him read, then it is permissible to
read according to it, and prayer performed using it
remains valid, according to the most correct opinion.
The second opinion is that prayer performed using
it is invalid. These opinions are both reliably reported
from the Imam Ahmad [ibn Hanbal], The third opin¬
ion is that if he prays the standard prayers using it,
he has not fulfilled his obligation, but if he uses it in
other prayers, they are not invalid. This is the opin¬
ion espoused by Abu al-Barakat Ibn Taymiyya, on
the grounds that, in the first case, the requirements
for the standard prayer were not completely met, and
that, in the second, no invalidating element occurred.
However, [the petitioner for legal opinions] may not
seek out the easiest obligations among the various
madhhabs or seek out what he wishes from whatever
madhhab he finds to contain it. Rather, he must en¬
deavor to seek the truth as far as this is possible.”
Conclusion
It should be apparent to you, from the arguments
presented in the ten points above, that the miserable
IJTIHAD AND THE REFUTATION OF NABHANI 171
al-Nabhani’s thesis concerning the closing of the gate
of ijtihad is false and heretical. We know necessar¬
ily that no single man during the time of the Com¬
panions engaged in the blind adoption of all of the
opinions of another Companion, not dismissing any
of his opinions while dismissing all the opinions of
others. Nor did such a person exist among the Suc¬
cessors, or the successors of the Successors. Let the
muqallidun try to prove us wrong by identifying a
single man who followed their disastrous ways in the
virtuous centuries, as they were termed by the Mes¬
senger of God, peace be upon him [that is, the first
three centuries of Islam]. This heretical innovation,
for which the Messenger, peace be upon him, ex¬
pressed blame, occurred in the fourth century [a.h.,
or 10th century a.d.]. Muqallids, who follow their
supposed authorities in everything they say, permit¬
ting or prohibiting the taking of women, lives, and
property, without knowing whether this is right or
wrong, are in grave danger. They shall be in a diffi¬
cult position before God [on the Day of Resurrec¬
tion], when those who made religious arguments
without knowledge will realize their error, for they
did so without any justification.
The hadith expert Ibn al-Qayyim criticized mu¬
qallids extensively in his book I‘lam al-muwaqqi‘in,
refuting the arguments of the ignorant concerning the
termination of ijtihad, and other respected scholars
have also written useful books on this issue. Had this
ignoramus [al-Nabhani] not raised the issue—even
though it has nothing to do with the topic of his
book—we would not have needed to open our mouth
or move our pen concerning it.
21
Abdullah Cevdet
Preface by the Translator
Abdullah Cevdet (Turkey, 1869-1932) was a leading publicist and freethinker who used
Islam to promote modernization and materialism. Cevdet was a devout Muslim and had
even written a eulogy of the Prophet, until his education at the Royal Military Academy
in Istanbul turned him toward European materialism. According to Cevdet, "science is
the religion of the elite, whereas religion is the science of the masses.” He therefore argued
that materialism should be promoted in Islamic terms—"stitched onto an Islamic jacket,”
as he put it. In 1889, he helped to found the Ottoman Union Committee, later called the
Committee of Union and Progress, whose opposition to Ottoman absolutism led to their
exile. In 1904, he founded the journal ictihad (Rational Interpretation ) in Geneva, Switzer¬
land, later moving it to Cairo, Egypt. While Europeans considered the journal Islamist, it
faced considerable opposition from Ottoman Muslims, culminating in the unprecedentedly
negative reaction to Cevdet’s Turkish translation of Reinhart Dozy's controversial work
on the history of Islam. This translation—whose introduction is presented here—was
banned, and all existing copies were confiscated. Despite having founded the organiza¬
tion that came to power in the Constitutional Revolution of 1908, Cevdet could not
return from exile until 191 I. In subsequent years, Cevdet became increasingly open in
his campaign against religiosity, including a notorious article ridiculing prayer. In the Turk¬
ish Republic, Cevdet's closest associates entered parliament, while he was stigmatized as
a collaborator of the European Allies' occupation of Istanbul after World War I, and as
a Kurdish nationalist, 1
History, in effect, is like a motion picture that trans¬
mits the conditions and transformations of the world
to vision, through reading; to the sense of hearing,
through listening; and to the center of perception and
consideration, which we call consciousness, through
one or both of these.
To put it in another way, history is similar to a
photographic plate that has not been touched up, the
lines and details of which are neither toned up or
down, a photograph exactly reflecting the original.
Real history is like that, and must be like that. Other
books that are not like this and yet are still called
history are either negligently written works or take
advantage of negligence. It was necessary to bring
into existence a “History of Islam” that truly pos¬
sesses the requisites and specifics of a real work of
history, and to submit it to the attention and con¬
sideration of our brothers in religion. I deliberately
use the words “bring into existence” because I have
verified that there is no such history [of Islam] in
the three major Islamic languages, Arabic, Persian,
and Turkish. The reason for this deficiency should
be sought mainly in the absolutism of Muslim rul¬
ers. History is the most eye-opening branch of the
sciences. It is obvious that open eyes cannot coexist
with absolutism and disinformation. People with
open eyes can discern oppression and freedom and
will develop a desire for justice and truth. The folly
of Muslim tyrants who claim to be the shadow of
God and whose tyranny and treachery overshadow
the most cruel and treacherous of creatures is best
Abdullah Cevdet, “ifade-i Miitercim” (Preface by the Trans¬
lator), in Reinhart Dozy, Tarih-i tslamiyet (The History of
Islam ) (Cairo, Egypt: Matbaa-i ictihad, 1908), volume 1,
pp. 3-8. Translation from Turkish and introduction by M.
§iikru Hanioglu.
1. M. §iikru Hanioglu, Bir Siyasal DusUniir Olarak Doktor
Abdullah Cevdet ve Donemi (Doctor Abdullah Cevdet: A Po¬
litical Thinker and His Time ) (Istanbul. Turkey: Ufdal
Ne§riyat, 1981); Karl Siissheim, '"Abd Allah Djevdet," Ency¬
clopedia of Islam , Supplement, edited by M. Th. Houtsma et
alia (Leiden, Netherlands: E. J. Brill. 1938), pp. 55-60.
172
summarized in the awful truth embodied in the fol¬
lowing couplet of Shaykh Sa’di [Iranian poet, 1184—
1292]:
The distress of mind of one who seeks justice
Can overthrow the king from his realm.
We strongly sensed the Muslims’ need for a “His¬
tory of Islam.” We have found a “History of Islam”
that possesses the required qualities among the su¬
perb works of the famous Dutch Orientalist, Profes¬
sor Doctor [Reinhart] Dozy [1820-1883]. We have
restricted ourselves to the judgment of “wisdom is
the believer’s stray camel: wherever one finds it, one
appropriates it.” We have translated this work [first
published in 1863], which is a product of an abso¬
lutely impartial good sense, and which possesses the
qualities of enormous erudition and thorough re¬
search, into Turkish from its French version entitled
Essai sur I’histoire de I’islamisme [Essay on the
History of Islam],
“The author is from the Netherlands, a non-Mus¬
lim, thus a stranger to the religion [of Islam], So is it
possible to trust what he says?” To this inevitable
question we respond in the following manner: Being
a Muslim does not consist in lhaving a Muslim]
name, fasting, and performing the prayers. “Religion
is social relations (mu ‘amala)” [a hadith, or tradition
of the Prophet]; religion is nothing other than social
relations. Learned, virtuous Doctor Dozy, who spent
his entire life in teaching and study, and who strove
to enlighten the minds of God’s people and to be
beneficial to them, is a thousand times more Muslim
than vagabond Hamids [a reference to the Ottoman
sultan, Abdiilhamid II, reigned 1876-1909], whose
deeds and desires are nefarious. It is our own Prophet
who says, “The Muslim is one from whose hand and
tongue people are safe,” “The best of men is he who
is the most useful to people,” and “One hour’s search
for knowledge is better than a thousand years’ acts
of worship.” Every learned and virtuous person is a
Muslim. An ignorant, immoral person is not a Mus¬
lim even if he stems from the lineage of the Prophet.
Culture and virtue will reduce all religions to one
religion, that of justice and truth, and are already
doing so:
The warring of 72 sects ignore.
Failing to find the truth, mere fables they
explore. [Hafiz, Iranian poet, circa 1325—
1390]
PREFACE BY THE TRANSLATOR 173
Doctor Dozy has covered the history of Islam down
to about forty years ago. The history of Islam during
these last forty years is reproduced from our erudite
friend A. Guy’s article entitled “Islam in the Last Forty
Years.” Mr. A. Guy is a young Orientalist. He has such
a high degree of knowledge of Islamic affairs and of
the obscurities of the Islamic religion that it would be
appropriate to say that he has no match among the
‘ulama ’ [religious scholars] of Islam.
His massive volume “Sources of Islam,” soon to
be published in French, will make it clear how tire¬
less a researcher this young Orientalist is, and what
an outstanding zeal for understanding he possesses.
The method that we have followed in translating
this essay is the same method that we have always
used with a religious scrupulousness; it is nothing
other than preserving the textual integrity of the origi¬
nal. There are only four letters which we have added
to the text, placing them in parentheses: they are
“S.A.” for salla’llahu alayh wa sallam [May God
bless him and grant him salvation], and “R.A.” for
radiallahu anh [May God be well pleased with him].
Some of our observations and additions are given
at the bottom of the pages as footnotes; they have
been differentiated from the footnotes of the author
by appending to them the initials “A.C.”
We are of the opinion that today there is no book
more beneficial to the Muslims, none the attentive
reading of which would be a more absolute necessity,
than the History of Islam. The times for naive or mis¬
leading works full of silly tales and deceptions is long
passed thanks to the enlightenment of evolution.
We should possess the courage to face the truth
regardless of how harsh it is and how strongly it con¬
tradicts our former beliefs and feelings. Bravery is not
only just exposing ourselves to the bullets of the
enemy. We must possess the power to abandon the un¬
dignified dignity of our ignorant selves in the face of
the divine magnificence of reality and truth, and of
adorning ourselves with the decoration of the sublime
grief of truth. We should demonstrate our bravery by
displaying a moral courage of this kind. If we seriously
consider the hadith of the Prophet, “Religion is social
relations”—which, as we have said, states that religion
is nothing other than social relations—then it is plain
how far most of us Muslims are inadequate in our re¬
ligion, or even lack it altogether. The best acts of
worship are those aiming to benefit and save all God's
people, beginning with one’s own self, or even sacri¬
ficing oneself.
174 Abdullah Cevdet
Those ignorant pietists who are not aware of this
subtle social aspect of the exalted religion of Islam can
only confirm the truth of the famous couplet by Mau-
lana Jalal al-Din al-Rumi [Iranian poet, 1207-1273]:
With head on the ground and backside in the air.
He considers to be God the place of his prayer! 2
True Islam cannot coexist with ignorance and
oppression. If we take into consideration the fact
that the word “Muslim” is derived from the word
“salvation,” it may be easily understood that Islam
cannot live in places where ignorance and op¬
pression prevail, and that ignorance and oppression
2. [Cevdet used this couplet in other writings as well to
criticize Islamic fanaticism, for example Dilmesti-i Mevlana
(Rumi 's Language of Spiritual Intoxication) (Istanbul, Otto¬
man Empire: Orhaniye Matbaasi, 1921), pp. 17-18.—Trans.]
cannot take root in places where Islam rules
supreme.
Here then is the aim of the study of history: by
examining the affairs and changes of the past and
drawing on the adventure of our fathers and grand¬
fathers, to reach a life-giving conclusion, and to de¬
rive a salutary lesson of awakening.
We repeat and confirm that the aim of translating
and publishing this work is to present for the under¬
standing of the Muslims a book the study of which
could provide such a lesson.
“Peace be upon those who follow right guidance!”
[Qur’an, Sura 20, Verse 47] 3
3. [In the Qur'an, Moses and Aaron are instructed to
speak these words to the Egyptian pharoah, and they have
become a conventional nongreeting to unbelievers at the end
of letters. Here Cevdet’s intention must be to exclude Mus¬
lim fanatics but include Dozy and Guy.—Trans.]
22
Musa Kazim
The Principles of Consultation and
Liberty in Islam and Reform and
Review of Religious Writings
Musa Kazim (T urkey, 1858-1920) was a leading member of the ‘ulama’ (religious scholar)
branch of the Committee of Union and Progress, an Ottoman senator, and Shaykh al¬
lslam (chief religious official) of the Ottoman Empire. Educated in a traditional manner,
Musa Kazim taught religious studies at seminaries and modern schools in Istanbul until
the Constitutional Revolution of 1908, defending Islam against its Christian critics and
defending constitutionalism against its Muslim critics. On the day of the revolution’s tri¬
umph, he authored a thirteen-page manifesto on Islam and constitutionalism, translated
in the first part of this chapter. Under the new regime, he became a member of the
Ottoman Senate and an organizer of clerical support for the regime. In 1910, he was
appointed Shaykh al-lslam; after a series of resignations and removals, he was reappointed
in 1911, 1916, and 1917. His opponents frequently accused him of being a freemason;
he denied the charges in a pamphlet in 1911, maintaining that he was a devotee of the
Naqshibandiyya Sufi order. During World War I, Musa Kazim published a pamphlet de¬
fending the Ottoman government's declaration of jihad (holy struggle), extending the
duty of jihad to all Muslims, not just Ottomans, Following the Ottoman defeat, he was
tried in a military court along with other leaders of the Committee of Union and Progress.
Due to illness, the British exempted him from imprisonment on Malta and banished him
instead, first to Bursa and then to Edime, where he died in 1920. 1
The Principles of Consultation and
Liberty in Islam
The divine ordinances that our lord Muhammad,
Prophet of the end of times and apostle sent to men
and genies, whose exalted mission happily coincided
with the period of the human mind’s highest devel¬
opment, was enjoined to communicate from God to
Musa Kazan, “islamda Usul-i Mejveret ve Hurriyet” (The Prin¬
ciples of Consultation and Liberty in Islam) and “Kiitiib-i
Kelamiyye’nin Ihtiyacat-i Asra Gore Islah ve TeTift” (Reform
and Review of Religious Writings According to the Require¬
ments of the Age), in Musa Kazim, Kiilliyat-i §eyh 'til-Islam
Musa Kazim: Dini, Iytima'i Makaleler (Collected Works of
Shaykh al-lslam Musa Kazim: Religious and Social Essays )
(Istanbul, Ottoman Empire: Evkaf-i Islamiye Matbaasi, 1919),
pp. 243-247, 289-293. The first selection was published as a
manifesto on July 24, 1908; the second piece was a speech
delivered at the §ehzade Club in Istanbul on August 20, 1909.
Translations from Turkish by M. §ukrij Hanioglu and Yektan
Tiirkyilmaz, respectively. Introduction by M. §ukrii Hanioglu.
all mankind can be divided into two groups: those
concerned with the other world, and those concerned
with this world. Each of these can then be subdivided
into two groups: matters of fundamental principles,
and matters of detail.
The fundamental ordinances pertaining to the next
world are concerned with matters of doctrine, while
1. Sadik Albayrak, Son Devrin Osmanli Ulemasi ilmiye
Ricalinin Teracim-i Ahvali (Biographies of Notable Religious
Scholars of the Late Ottoman Era ) (Istanbul, Turkey: Mill!
Gazete Yayinlari. 1981), volumes 4-5, pp. 157-158; Abdiil-
kadir Altinsu, Osmanli §eyhulislamlari (Ottoman Chief Reli¬
gious Officials ) (Ankara, Turkey: Ayyildiz Matbaasi, 1972),
pp. 233-237; Osmanli Ilmiye Salnamesi (Yearbook of Ottoman
Religious Scholars ) (Istanbul, Ottoman Empire: Matbaa-i
Amire, 1916). pp. 626-628; David Kushner, Ҥeyh-iil-Islam
Musa Kazim Efendi’s Ideas on State and Society,” pp. 603-
610 in V. Milletlerarasi Tiirkiye Sosyal ve Iktisat Tarihi
Kongresi, Tebligler (Fifth International Congress on the So¬
cial and Economic History of Turkey: Communications) (An¬
kara, Turkey: Turk Tarihi Kurumu Basimevi, 1990).
175
176 Musa Kazim
ordinances on details pertaining to the next world are
concerned with acts of worship. In addition, the fun¬
damental ordinances pertaining to this world relate
to the administration of the affairs of the country,
while ordinances on details pertaining to this world
are about transactions and punishments.
Without having fundamental ordinances pertain¬
ing to the next world, executing ordinances on de¬
tails pertaining to the next world would be absolutely
useless. For example, it is self-evident that worship
and acts of piety would not be of the slightest bene¬
fit to someone who does not believe in the existence
of God and His uniqueness. Similarly, it cannot be
imagined that anything will be gained from imple¬
menting ordinances on details pertaining to this
world unless the corresponding fundamental ordi¬
nances are executed. For example, unless justice and
equity are respected, no benefit can be expected from
the punishment of criminals.
The basic principles of the fundamental ordi¬
nances pertaining to this world are:
Consulting the umma [Islamic community] in every
matter.
Respecting justice and equity in every matter.
Entrusting the affairs of the country and the inter¬
ests of the umma , which are a divine charge, to
qualified persons.
Our proofs of these are noble Qur’anic verses (and
some hadiths [narratives] of the Prophet), like the
following:
And seek their counsel in the matter. [Sura 3, Verse
159]
And their affairs [are decided in] consultation
among them. [Sura 42, Verse 38]
When you judge between men, you should judge
justly. [Sura 4, Verse 58]
Be just; it is closer to piety. [Sura 5, Verse 8]
If you speak, be just even if the matter concerns
a relative. [Sura 6, Verse 152]
God commands you to deliver to the owners that
which is held in trust with you. [Sura 4, Verse 58]
In the first of these verses, God orders His Mes¬
senger to consult with the umma in every matter.
Since, as explained in the science of jurisprudence,
an order to do something entails that its contrary' is
forbidden, it is established that according to the ex¬
alted tenor of this noble verse, failure to consult with
the umma was absolutely forbidden, even to that
great Messenger to men and genies who was the re¬
cipient of God’s revelation. If such a holy person,
who had received God’s revelation, was commanded
to consult with his umma in every matter, then all
Muslims, especially the exalted caliphs, are all the
more obligated to consult with the umma.
In the second verse, God shows that the affairs of
Muslims consist in consultation among themselves.
With this, He confirms in a categorical fashion that
the order for consultation is the greatest pillar of
Islam. Thus all those who bear the exalted title of
“Muslim” are under the obligation to obey this heav¬
enly order and divine command.
In the third verse, God orders us to make judg¬
ments between people with justice and equity, and
this reveals that rendering justice in all cases is a
religious duty.
In the fourth verse, it is enjoined: “Be just, for this
is the closest thing to piety.”
Likewise, in the fifth verse, it is enjoined: “You
should not deviate from justice whenever you speak,
even if the matter concerns your closest relative.”
The sixth verse tells us that “God commands you
to deliver to the owners that which is held in trust with
you.” Since the content of an order stems from some¬
thing that is incumbent, it is absolutely clear, accord¬
ing to the tenor of this verse, that entrusting the affairs
of the nation and matters of the state—the greatest and
most important of all trusts—to those who are quali¬
fied is one of the duties incumbent on their authority.
God specifies those who are qualified for this
sacred trust in the noble verse: “The noblest among
you in the eyes of God is the most pious.” [Sura 49,
Verse 13] It is clear from this exalted verse that the
foremost quality that persons undertaking the duties
of the religious community must possess is piety.
Aristocratic birth and nobility play no part whatso¬
ever in this matter. Piety means avoiding the viola¬
tion of the rights of God and humans, and it is thus
dependent without any doubt upon knowing those
rights. Therefore, a person who would undertake one
of the duties of the religious community must be
well-informed about that duty, and be one of those
powerful and capable people who are distinguished
by their integrity and ability.
Accordingly our Prophet, the teacher of all beings,
the most perfect of salutations be upon Him, person¬
ally always favored consulting his umma in every
matter of public import. During his lifetime, he en¬
trusted the administration to those who were quali-
PRINCIPLES OF CONSULTATION AND REFORM AND REVIEW
177
fied for it. In this regard, he paid no attention to such
considerations as kinship or friendship. All the ap¬
pointments made by the Prophet were based upon
competence. He never deviated from justice and eq¬
uity in the slightest degree in any matter.
Integrity, competence, justice—these were the
qualities that the Messenger of God wanted! These
are the virtues that the Prophet sought! While he was
alive, while he was leaving this world, his hopes were
always, always directed to these: Integrity, compe¬
tence, and justice!
It is well known that three days prior to his de¬
parture to the next world, he ascended to the blessed
pulpit and demonstrated to his umma and all his
Companions with his last breath that he was justice
incarnate in these lofty words:
O my umma and companions! If I have taken
anybody’s property, here is my property, let him
come forward and take it. If I struck anybody in the
back, here is my back, let him come forward and
strike me in the back.
Thanks to such superior virtues of his, he left for¬
ever in the hearts of the umma an inextinguishable
affection for himself, an affection that is genuine,
sincere, and free from hypocrisy of all kinds. The
rightly guided caliphs [that is, the first four succes¬
sors of the Prophet], who were honored with that
sacred post after him, literally followed in the sub¬
lime footsteps of the august Messenger. In this way
they showed to all peoples who were lost in the dark¬
ness of ignorance, and groaning under the yoke of
slaveiy, the meaning of humanity, civilization, free¬
dom, equality, justice, prosperity, and happiness.
Thus on these firm foundations laid down by our
Prophet, a virtuous government, the like of which has
never been seen on the face of the earth, was estab¬
lished and this bright sun of truth spread the glitter
of justice to all regions of the world, thanks to the
assiduous and unremitting efforts of the rightly
guided caliphs. Within a short time, [this govern¬
ment] shone the light of happiness on more than a
hundred million wretched people who were longing
for freedom, yearning for justice, and craving for
equality. It was such a virtuous government that all
peoples who took refuge in its protection, be they
Muslims, non-Muslims, Christians, or Jews, one and
all enjoyed equal rights. In the eyes of the law, the
right of a Christian or a Jew was owed the same re¬
spect as the rights of the caliph.
What justice this was, what freedom, what equal¬
ity! A Jew comes and is tried along with a caliph. If
one of them sits, the other cannot be left to stand. If
one of them is called by his name, the other cannot
be called by his honorific or title.
All these are uncontested facts. Here is history,
the history of humanity! Here are deeds, the deeds
of Islam. Study them, examine them! Is it possible
to see a sign of the smallest degree of inequality, the
smallest degree of injustice, the smallest degree of
arbitrariness? Do you need proofs for the fact that
Islam treated everyone equally, without distinction
of race, creed, religion, and nationality, and that it
granted everyone his personal liberty and all his le¬
gitimate rights?
Here is a famous trial for you! This is a trial in
which ‘Ali [ibn Abi Talib, fourth successor of the
Prophet, 656-661] is defendant and a Jew is plain¬
tiff. The two are at law in the court of Qadi [Shurayh
ibn al-Harith al-Kindi, judge in Kufa, 7th century].
Hasan [‘Ali’s son, 624—669] comes to give evidence
in favor of his father. The judge refuses this. ‘Ali
accepts this, and shows no sign of resentment. The
judge calls the Jew by his name but mentions ‘Ali
by his honorific as “O Father of Hasan!” This angers
‘Ali. He senses a hint of inequality in this. That is
what that virtuous government was like, that is what
the leaders of that state were like, that is what the
justice, equality, and freedom dispensed to the sub¬
jects of that government were like.
This is such a firmly established truth that today
all civilized peoples around the world are obliged to
admit and acknowledge it.
Thus it is clear that the fundamental principles
that form the bases for humanity and civilization—
principles such as consultation, equality, freedom,
and justice—are a legal right granted by God 1300
years ago to Muslims and all human beings. This
right was quite simply given to us by God. Nobody
else is entitled to claim to have conferred it. But,
alas, after the time of the rightly guided caliphs, the
political ordinances of religion were cast in a differ¬
ent mold, persons acceding to the caliphate thought
of their own personal interests. They yielded to their
hedonistic desires, and in order to realize their aims,
they usurped these rights, this freedom, this equal¬
ity, this justice granted to the Muslim umma and to
all human beings by God as a favor for which grati¬
tude is due. Affirming that “obeying those in author¬
ity is a binding duty” [paraphrase of Qur'an, Sura
178 Musa Kazim
4, Verse 59], they failed entirely to take into con¬
sideration the conditions that limit this obedience.
They wholly uprooted the firm pillar of Islam from
its foundations. They set a bad example for those
who came after them. They spoiled the faith of ig¬
norant people, who were ignorant of the conditions
that prevailed at the beginning of Islam and of the
ordinances of the holy law, telling them that “Islam
prevents progress.” The result was that this false
idea prevailed in all regions of the world until the
fortunate day of the accession to the throne His
Royal Highness [Abdiilhamid II, Ottoman sultan,
reigned 1876-1909].
Since God is the true protector of this religion of
Islam and has promised to preserve and forever pro¬
tect the freedom-granting ordinances of the illustri¬
ous shari'a [religious law] of Muhammad, our sul¬
tan immediately upon his accession to the caliphate
put the principle of consultation into effect and pro¬
mulgated the constitution [in 1876], with the exalted
intention of carrying out the duties of the caliphate
with which he had been charged by God.
However, he was unable to put the ordinances
comprehended in this exalted law [the constitution]
into effect, owing to the incitations and instigations
of certain traitors to the religion and nation. Thank
God, today such false obstacles have been entirely
removed, and thus His Royal Majesty feels that the
time to put this exalted law into effect has come, and
he has set about carrying out this sacred duty made
incumbent upon him by God. And because of this,
he has placed all the Islamic world and humanity at
large in his debt. May God bless His Royal Majesty
and make him successful with His divine guidance,
and make the Islamic community and Ottoman na¬
tion always happy and cheerful with the gift of such
freedom. Amen.
Reform and Review of Religious
Writings According to the
Requirements of the Age
During the first years of Islam, the obvious meanings
of the verses [of the Qur’an] and hadith [narratives
of the Prophet] were deemed sufficient. Especially
during the time of our Prophet, everyone would settle
issues they were confused about by asking the
Prophet directly. There was no need to write or read
books—any issue related to either the religious or
temporal realms was settled in this way. It was not
deemed necessary to write books.
Then in the time of Successors [to the Companions
of the Prophet], differences emerged. As a result, to
maintain the unity of Islam, books began to be writ¬
ten. Because, if there are differences of opinion, this
could lead to conflict, and divisions might arise among
the Muslims. God forbid that the emergence of divi¬
sions would, by weakening the power of the umma,
lead to its destruction. For that reason, they began at
that time to prepare books in an attempt to eliminate
conflicts and distinguish truth from error.
In particular, books on the science of theology were
written. It was said that the possessors of understand¬
ing would recognize the truth. And this worked. How¬
ever, in these books there was no mention of philoso¬
phy, as the philosophical sciences had not yet been
introduced to Islam. Each issue was interpreted by
reference to a verse or a hadith. This was the mode of
thinking of the ancient ‘ulama' [religious scholars],
because that was the need at the time.
Later, the philosophical sciences were introduced
to Arabic through translation. As a result, many other
disciplines and madhhabs [schools of thought]
emerged. For instance, up to that time nobody knew
about the “Aristotelian” school, because there was
no mention of it. This was the first [new philosophy]
to appear. Similarly, nobody knew what “naturalism”
meant; there was no such notion. These ideas, appear¬
ing along with all those [new] disciplines, also had
their adherents, but they were few. Later, the
Aristotelians turned out to be the most popular, and
the number of its followers increased significantly.
Consequently there emerged a need to defend reli¬
gion against these people. As the need to defend re¬
ligion against both polytheists and Aristotelians was
perceived, books began to be written for this purpose;
that is, philosophy was added into the science of the¬
ology, because this was necessary. This is the science
of theology practiced by contemporary ‘ulama’.
But how did this happen? First, the ‘ulama ’ stud¬
ied these sciences, then they defended the beliefs of
Islam against philosophy, writing books for this pur¬
pose. This went on for a very long time. Later, the
polytheist school failed to attract much support, [so]
the major struggle was against the Aristotelians.
Eventually, the Aristotelians also disappeared. That
is, science changed, and the Aristotelians’ principles
were overturned. Hence there was no longer a need
to defend against them. Since there were no adher-
PRINCIPLES OF CONSULTATION AND REFORM AND REVIEW
179
ents of these sciences and no one to support and ad¬
vocate these disciplines, why should we protect re¬
ligious rulings by articulating defenses against them?
After the disappearance of these philosophies, the
“materialists” took their place. Inevitably, naturalists
also gained in popularity. Now a need arose to de¬
fense against these [philosophies]. Just as the promi¬
nent ‘ulama’, especially the recent generation,
struggled against the naturalists, Aristotelians, and
polytheists, and succeeded [in this struggle], now a
need arises for us, too, to struggle against our con¬
temporary opponents.
“Is it appropriate for us to alter [the earlier
struggles]? Let us continue with the model of their
[earlier] struggles. ..
If someone makes this argument, we would reply:
“Very well, but against whom?” Since there is no
faction of scholars—or as they are recently called,
philosophers—pursuing this mode of thinking, why
should we put forth these defenses?
[Aristotelians used to say:] “This universe is com¬
posed of 13 spheres. The first is earth, the second is
water, the third is air, the fourth is light, and there
are nine celestial spheres, all of which are concen¬
tric. These celestial spheres are eternal, and the type
and kind of the remaining spheres are also eternal.
Thus, the universe is eternal.”
Now nobody says such things. Therefore even if
we say we are defending Islam by shouting, “No, you
are wrong to call [the world] eternal, it may be cre¬
ated,” what would be the use? Today’s philosophy
agrees with us: “Yes, the earth is finite.” And the
creatures on it are also finite. 2 Then [they say]: “What
we call the heavens are not nine concentric spheres,
as Ptolemy [ancient astronomer, 2nd century] argued.
Such a heaven does not exist.” Even if we say it does,
who would listen [to us]? Since the adversary does
not even accept the existence of the heavens, how can
we convince them by saying that it is created? Phi¬
losophy currently believes that space is infinite, and
that the bodies in it are similarly infinite. With re¬
gard to form, these bodies are Finite; only the funda¬
mental atomic particles are eternal. There is no form
in this universe that is eternal—all are finite, only
atomic particles are eternal.
2. [Musa Kazan is playing with two meanings of the term
hadith , translated here as “created”: in the Islamic argument,
it means “created by God”; in the modem scientific argument,
it means cosmologically “finite.”—Ed.]
This is the argument of today’s philosophy. So if
we argue against them that the heavens are not eter¬
nal, but created—they will laugh at us. “What are you
talking about?” they will say.
[We might respond:] “Then humans are not eter¬
nal, but created.”
“Of course they are created. The earth is divided
into many layers, and humans only recently appeared
on the upper layer. Do you know nothing about ge¬
ology? This is obvious. Who says that humans are
eternal?”
“I do not know, someone said it once upon a time.
I am arguing against that.”
Then they will say, “Find those people and argue
against them.” So it is obvious that our current teach¬
ing must be reformed accordingly. There is an urgent
need for the writing of books that will refute the
philosophy of our era.
But if it is said, “We will repeat the old arguments
anyway”—then that is a different matter. But religion
cannot be defended in this way. The Aristotelians
also accept the existence of God, saying: “God ex¬
ists. There must be a cause of the existence of this
universe, and this is the prime mover (wajib al-
wujud). But this prime mover is necessary [that is,
the philosophical system must assume God’s exis¬
tence], not autonomous [as in Islam], For this reason,
the universe is eternal, since that which emanates
from a necessary agent is eternal. Since God is nec¬
essary, the universe is eternal, because the universe
emanated from Him, and emanated without any
cause.” We used to argue against this: “No, God is
not necessary, but rather autonomous.”
If you say this now to contemporary philosophers,
they will laugh at us. “What are you talking about?”
they will say. There is no God, according to their
theory, much less “necessary” and “autonomous.”
Thus, there is no use in mentioning the issues of
necessity and autonomy.
The ancient authorities concluded that “God has
no attributes. He is the True One. Therefore it is ab¬
surd to represent Him with certain attributes. Since
God is the prime mover. He is free of necessity. If
He had attributes, how could He be the True One?
Then there would be a need for attributes, but such a
need is incompatible with his being the prime mover.
He is self-existent, omniscient, almighty, all-desirous,
and so on. Knowledge is identical with Him, power
is identical with Him, anything that we call an at¬
tribute is identical with Him.”
180 Musa Kazim
The Mu’tazilites [early Muslim rationalists] also
adhered to this [line of thinking], as they acknowl¬
edged. Perhaps one could now make a similar de¬
fense: “No, God has attributes, God is omniscient in
knowledge, almighty in power, immortal in life. He
is all-desirous in His will, and all-speaking in His
word.” If you said this against our opponents, they
would tell us, “We do not accept the basis [of your
argument], much less the matter of the attributes.” In
brief, our opponents today, that is, the philosophers,
do not accept the divine and the prophetic. Actually,
some naturalists have accepted the existence of God.
However, if you investigate the matter further, what
they call God is Nature.
Therefore, our most pressing task is to review the
theological books in accordance with present needs.
And how are we to do this? First of all, we have to
know the sciences of our opponents. Otherwise, it is
impossible to argue against them. Indeed, earlier
‘ulama’ did just this. First they were educated in the
sciences of contemporaneous philosophers, then they
convinced them with their words. Now if we try to
defend ourselves with our present level of knowl¬
edge, we will be ridiculous. Because we do not know.
First of all, let us be educated in those sciences. Then
let us defend Islam on the basis of these sciences. Now
it is time to recognize this need. There is no use in
displaying fanaticism in this respect. In fact, it would
be harmful. The literature shows that all of the ‘ulama ’
in every era wrote books in accordance with the needs
of the day. As a result, later ‘ulama ’, in translating
philosophy into Arabic, deemed it necessary to reform
the science of theology, and added many new topics
from naturalists and theologians. We have the same
need. We must also reform the theological books in
accordance with the needs of our era.
23
Jamal al-Din al-Qasimi
Guiding Mankind to Act on the
Basis ofTelegraphic Messages
Jamal al-Din al-Qasimi (Syria, 1866-1914) was the leading proponent of Islamic mod¬
ernism in early twentieth-century Damascus. His publications numbered more than two
dozen and covered religious disciplines such as Islamic law, theology, and exegesis; Mus¬
lim religious customs; and Arab history. He came from a family of minor religious func¬
tionaries and obtained his religious education from the city's leading religious scholars.
Qasimi emerged as a proponent of reformist ideas in the 1890s, but he was not able to
openly publish his work until the Ottoman Constitutional Revolution created a freer po¬
litical climate in 1908. He was one of a handful of liberal religious scholars in Damascus
who favored constitutional government. Moreover, a younger generation of Syrians with
inclinations toward Arab nationalism drew inspiration from his call for an Arab cultural
and literary revival. His religious and political views made him the object of Ottoman
suspicions and conservative scholars' hostility. Consequently, he endured several episodes
of persecution. His religious wntings focused on two themes. One exhorted Muslims to
overcome historical divisions into rival legal schools and sects by returning to the Qur'an
and the practice of the Prophet as the only bases of authority, The other emphasized the
rational character of Islamic beliefs and practices. In this passage, Qasimi seeks to dem¬
onstrate that Islamic law possesses methods and principles, in particular the principle of
ijtihad (independent reasoning), that allow for the adoption of new technology. To sup¬
port this view, Qasimi cites an extensive series of classical Islamic authorities and texts. 1
In the name of God, the beneficent, the merciful
Praise God, lord of the worlds. Prayer and peace
on our master Muhammad, seal of the prophets, and
on his exemplary family and Companions, and on
their sincerely believing Successors until the Day of
Judgment.
A judge asked me if he may act according to well-
established information in a telegraphic message
from an authority, such as a governor, another judge,
or another trusted source, announcing on the basis
of legally acceptable evidence the start or the end of
Ramadan [the month of dawn-to-dusk fasting], given
that celestial bodies rise at the two places at the same
time. 2 1 replied to him on the basis of the legal opin¬
ions of famous ‘ulama’ [religious scholars] on this
issue, and I shared with him both general and detailed
texts about it. I told him that ‘ulama ’ of the last cen¬
tury and current leaders of knowledge have devoted
much attention to the issue of the telegraph. They
have lent it meticulous scrutiny and have taken the
utmost care in understanding it. Some favor acting
according to it in both social transactions and reli¬
gious rituals; while others would act according to it
only in certain categories of transactions; yet others
favor using it in beginning and breaking the fast,
depending on the conclusions they reach in under¬
taking ijtihad [independent reasoning], I said that I
have not heard of a single major scholar who has
Jamal al-Din al-Qasimi, Kitab al-irshad al-khalq (Book of the
People’s Guidance ) (Damascus, Syria: Matba'at al-Muqtabas,
1911), pp. 2-11. Translation from Arabic and introduction
by David D. Commins.
1. Nizar Abazah, Jamal al-Din al-Qasimi (Jamal al-Din
al-Qasimi) (Damascus, Syria: Dar al-Qalam, 1997); David D.
Commins, Islamic Reform: Politics and Social Change in
Late Ottoman Syria (New York: Oxford University Press,
1990); Zafir Qasimi, Jamal al-Din al-Qasimi wa-'asruh
(Jamal al-Din al-Qasimi and His Era) (Damascus. Syria:
Maklabat Atlas, 1965).
2. [The timing is essential because Ramadan is deemed
to begin and end with the appearance of a new moon.—
Trans.]
182 Jamal al-Din al-Qasimi
issued a legal opinion against acting according to tele¬
graphic messages in all circumstances. There is no
such report from any renowned scholars whose legal
opinions are followed. What kind of scholar could fall
into such confusion on this matter when he knows that
the telegraph is the prop of kingdoms’ vital affairs? Is
it possible for the most perfect of all laws to neglect a
matter of general public benefit, especially one of the
greatest technical advances, when the principles of the
shari ‘a [Islamic law] provide for every time and place?
The lofty shari ‘a’s basic legal principles cannot invali¬
date the telegraph; rather, they connect it to similar
matters that are well known. They remove the mask
of obscurity from the face of controversy with the
extensive study and reasoning of its profound think¬
ers. Because the legal opinions of the 'ulama ’ on this
issue tend to be fairly brief, I have sought to explain
in detail their sources. For in generality resides con¬
fusion, while in detail there is neither doubt nor con¬
jecture. This is what has prompted me to compose this
book. I seek the assistance of the Exalted One who
gives success in arriving at the correct conclusion.
Preface on Method
Part One: The excellence of Islam includes the ap¬
plicability of its principles to the laws of civilization.
Islam’s magnanimity includes the way specific regu¬
lations can be derived from its basic legal principles.
Ancient and modem generations have adapted to new
situations on the basis of well-known principles.
Every age has men who uphold God’s will with
proofs. The basis for knowing the proper statute for
any given case is its evidence.
The excellence of Islam includes the applicabil¬
ity of its basic legal principles to the laws of civili¬
zations; the suitability of its principles to the needs
of every time and place; basing its rulings on bring¬
ing benefit and preventing harm; its distinction in
removing encumbrances and fetters; its opening the
doors of ease and facility; and its blocking the ways
of anguish and difficulty.
Its magnanimity includes the rise of the madhahib
[schools of Islamic law] from its wise sources; the
acquisition of its principles from the luminous niche
of its lamp [the Qur’an]; and the breadth of its spe¬
cific regulations to allow for the adoption of neces¬
sities and luxuries, however much inventions and
discoveries multiply.
Islam’s qualities include its guidance to methods
of discovering laws through extensive study and rea¬
soning, so that experts may easily relate all benefi¬
cial inventions to Islam’s stipulations, certainties,
generalities, and apparent meanings. Furthermore,
Islam provides for the adoption of beneficial inven¬
tions because of its magnanimity and its agreement
with ease and mercy.
Both ancient and recent jurisprudents, mercy and
contentment be upon them, have adopted new con¬
veniences and ways of life according to the basic
legal principles and specific regulations of the
sharVa. If that were not the case, then why are there
so many huge volumes of rulings and abundant legal
opinions on various cases? Are they not for novel
situations that have arisen in both recent and ancient
times? Of course they are. Thus it is necessary to
adapt to novel situations in human society on the
basis of the well-known principles of the true reli¬
gion. Doing so helps people in both religious and
worldly matters, and allows them to live according
to firmly established customs.
The founders of the legal schools, God be pleased
with them, acquired their stature and are considered
exemplars of knowledge because they attained such
proficiency in deriving specific regulations and such
judiciousness in religious understanding that their
knowledge became the standard of the religious sci¬
ences. They reached this distinction only by plunging
into the details of affairs after studying the underly¬
ing rationales of existence, tracing every specific regu¬
lation to a basic legal principle, and adopting a stat¬
ute on the basis of that principle. A sage once said,
“The Muslims’ mujtahids [religious scholars qualified
to perform ijtihad] have taken into consideration many
principles of their law and adapted to the customs of
various places and times, according to the Book [the
Qur’an] and the sunna [the precedents and advice of
the Prophet]. Therefore, the Islamic legal schools,
taken altogether, suffice for the discovery of all reli¬
gious laws to regulate social transactions in all parts
of the world, while complying with the basic principles
of religious rulings.’’ He supports this opinion by re¬
ferring to such principles of legal extension as custom
and the consideration of benefits.
The introduction of the telegraph resembles ear¬
lier innovations that did not exist in the time of the
Companions or the Successors or the founders of the
legal schools, but on which contemporary legal ex¬
perts have issued legal opinions—innovations such
GUIDING MANKIND TO ACT 183
as cannons and clocks used for fasting and prayer,
and countless other matters in worship and social
transactions. The telegraph is but a drop in the ocean
of discoveries and inventions in coming ages, includ¬
ing conveniences and benefits for people of all
classes—as the Qur’an states, “There will be created
what you do not know.” [Sura 16, Verse 8] If we do
not adopt the telegraph according to fixed principles
of discovery through reasoning and analogy, then do
we not congeal religion and block the way of ancient
and recent generations, and forever constrict what God
made wide through understanding and discovery?
One of the Muslims’ greatest blessings is that
every age has men who uphold God’s will with
proofs and clarify obscure issues with proper meth¬
ods. This is evident from the numerous religious
judges in every place who mle on issues that were
not stipulated in the two noble sources [the Qur’an
and the surma]. They extract rulings from the two
sources by resorting to extensive study and reason¬
ing. The abundance of legal opinions and judges is
an emblem of the survival of ijtihad until the Day of
Judgment. Every age has men who uphold the shari ‘a
with proofs. Anyone who wishes may refer to the
book, “The Virtue of the Notables,” by Imam [Jalal
al-Din] al-Suyuti [Egyptian scholar, 1445-1505],
which contains long lists of mujtahids —and that was
in just one particular place. How many other men
would be counted in all places? Indeed, it would be
a boundless ocean.
Some worthless fellow might suspect—and it is
said that suspicion is a sin—that current advocates
of scholarly reform intend to use ijtihad to establish
a special legal school and to call on believers to ad¬
here exclusively to it, to deviate from the views of
the founders of the madhahib, and to detract from the
nobility of earlier generations. God save us from such
ignorance and misunderstanding! Whoever thinks
this way is more lost than a herd of cattle. What rea¬
sonable person would call for an increase in sectari¬
anism and divisiveness? Instead, the intention is to
arouse the concern of leading scholars to become
familiar with issues through evidence, to research
their sources, to explore the books of the ancestors
and the founders of the madhahib on basic legal prin¬
ciples and specific regulations, to become familiar
with the ways of extracting and discovering rulings
and with the proofs of agreement and disagreement,
then to aspire for the strongest evidence and to seek
the firmest opinion, as was the custom of the upright
ancestors and numerous later generations. Later gen¬
erations depend on earlier ones for all their scholar¬
ship and for the treasures they stored. But mental
faculties vary from one person to the next. Grasping
the purposes of the shari ‘a and the underlying ration¬
ales for deriving specific regulations, discerning the
kernel from the husk in various matters that are the
subject of ijtihad because they are not textually stipu¬
lated—these are paths that the ancestors pursued and
methods followed by prominent men to the present
day. Ahmad Ibn Faris [possibly al-Qazwini, religious
scholar, 10th century], God have mercy on him, said,
“Who forbade later generations from contradicting
earlier ones? Do not accept the view of whoever says,
‘The former left nothing for the latter.’ Leave aside
the view of another who says, ‘How much did the
former leave for the latter?’ Is this world nothing but
changing times? Does not every time have its men?
Are not the sciences after the fundamental principles
anything but the fruits of understanding and reason?
Who ever restricted excellence to a particular age and
stopped it at a certain time? Do not later men study,
compose, and see things like earlier men? What
would you say to contemporary jurisprudents if they
needed to know the statute for a situation that had
never before occurred? Do you not know that every
heart has a mind, and every mind reaches its own
conclusion? Why do you constrict what is wide, for¬
bid what is permitted, and block the clear way? If
people were limited to the books of the ancients, then
a great deal of knowledge would be lost, penetrat¬
ing minds would go astray, articulate tongues would
be blunted, and we would hear nothing but repeti¬
tion. Do you urge the revival of what the ages have
covered over, the renewal of what the passage of time
has worn out, the relegation to files of what contem¬
porary minds have created, and the denial of this era?
Even so, if one sought that, he would miss the mark
and you would still read of new discoveries that will
thrill and delight you.”
The jurisprudents stipulated that the mujtahid
must know those situations that are the subject of
consensus [one of four bases of Islamic law, along
with the Qur'an, the surma, and analogy], so that he
would not give a legal opinion in opposition to con¬
sensus. [Abu Hamid Muhammad] al-Ghazzali [major
Iranian religious scholar, 1059-1111] wrote, "The
desired end is that one know that his legal opinion is
not opposed to consensus, either by virtue of know¬
ing that it agrees with one of the legal schools or by
184 Jamal al-Din al-Qasimi
knowing that this is an unprecedented occurrence
with which the authors of consensus had no famil¬
iarity; that is sufficient.”
Part Two: On the opinions of the founders of
the madhahib about the essence of
jurisprudence and jurisprudents.
The Imam Badr al-Din [Muhammad ibn Bahadur] al-
Zarkashi [Egyptian religious scholar, circa 1344-
1392] wrote, “Jurisprudence includes several mean¬
ings. First is knowledge of the rulings for cases
according to a text or through discovery of rulings
through reasoning. On this the masters have written
extensive commentaries. Second is knowledge of
combining likenesses and distinguishing between dif¬
ferences. On this meaning there are so many discus¬
sions among the ancestors that some say that jurispru¬
dence consists only of difference and likeness. Third
is the discussion of knotty issues for the purpose of
sharpening the mind. Fourth are sophisms, quizzes,
riddles, and legal fictions. Fifth is knowledge of the
principles and exact rules by which specific regula¬
tions are derived. This last kind is the most valuable,
the most general, the most complete, and the most
perfect. By it the jurisprudent becomes prepared to
undertake ijtihad. It is truly the root of jurisprudence.”
The second meaning is called “the science of simi¬
larities and likenesses.” Imam al-Suyuti wrote, “It is
a great science by which one becomes thoroughly
acquainted with the real meanings of jurisprudence,
as well as its sources and its underlying rationales.
One becomes proficient at understanding it and de¬
velops a command of it. One is able to make connec¬
tions and extract meanings, to know the rulings for
unprecedented events that do not cease with the pas¬
sage of time. Therefore, some of our masters have
said, ‘Jurisprudence is the knowledge of likenesses.’”
Imam al-Ghazzali wrote, “The scholar is the heir
of the Prophet, God’s prayer and peace be upon him,
only if he is thoroughly acquainted with all of the
shari'a 's meanings. Its meanings and underlying ra¬
tionales are attained at first only by the prophets, and
they are discovered through reasoning, after the proph¬
ets’ instruction about them, only by the ‘ulama ’, who
are the heirs of the prophets, upon them be peace.”
He also wrote, “The specific regulations are
known through the basic legal principles, not on the
basis of those principles’ literal meanings, but on the
basis of implied meanings. For example, the saying
of the Prophet, upon him be peace, ‘The judge should
not issue a decision when he is angry,’ is also under¬
stood to imply that he does not judge when he is in
discomfort because of hunger, pain from an illness,
or a need to urinate.”
Shaykh Muhammad ‘ Abduh [modernist Egyptian
religious scholar, 1849-1905; see chapter 3], God
have mercy upon him, wrote, “How much stubborn
ignorance is removed solely by maintaining clear
distinctions between categories? Who could get con¬
fused about the meaning of jurisprudence in the
Prophet’s saying, prayers and peace be upon him, ‘To
whomever God wishes well, He gives understanding
of religion?’ One may hold the view that jurispru¬
dence consists of cramming in one’s mind shari‘a
rulings issued by specialists in deriving regulations,
without distinguishing between perceptive ones and
those who blindly imitate precedent. You can elimi¬
nate the confusion for such an arrogant one and re¬
move his ignorance by saying, ‘Knowledge of
shari 1 a ordinances falls into two categories. One type
consists of perceiving the intentions of the law in
every ruling and understanding the underlying ratio¬
nale of its ruling in every ordinance. God provided
laws for his servants so that they may enjoy happi¬
ness in both worlds; that purpose does not change
from one age of history to another, and it is uncon¬
ditional. The perceptive individual finds application
for the basic legal principles in all eventualities, how¬
ever much people’s conditions change, as long as
people endure. The only one who has this quality is
the judicious believer who hears and hearkens to
God’s call with his heart and mind, not with arro¬
gance and pride.
‘“The second type takes the forms of mlings from
numerous disputations and crams them with the ideas
of one partisan side in a kind of battle of minds, know¬
ing only that something came from somebody with¬
out looking at the time and place of the speaker or the
opinion. This type gets the same result for both the
believer and the unbeliever. A good person, a wicked
person, one who suspends the law with legal fiction,
one who acts according to the law, one who stands at
its limit: All reach the same conclusion.’
“If the categories are kept distinct, then confusion
disappears, and the meaning is made clear, even to
simpletons.”
Imam Wali Allah al-Dihlawi [Indian religious
scholar, 1703-1762] wrote, “Knowing the purposes
on which rulings are based is an exact science. Only
GUIDING MANKIND TO ACT
185
an individual with a refined mind and upright under¬
standing delves into it. The Companions [of the
Prophet] who were jurisprudents learned the rules of
deriving specific regulations, of making things easy,
and of religion by witnessing the circumstances in
which commands and prohibitions were issued, just
as the doctor’s students know the purposes of the
medicines that he prescribes by long practice and
experience. The Companions attained the highest
rank in knowing the law’s purposes.”
Part Three: On how the Companions,
the Successors, and the founders of
the madhahib used analogy and
reasoning to derive specific regulations for
events that are not stipulated in
the Qur’an or the sunna.
Imam [Muhammad] Ibn al-Qayyim [al-Jawziyya,
religious scholar, Damascus, 1292-1350] wrote,
“When one seeks to know the ruling for something,
one should first consult the Qur’an. If it contains no
ruling, then one consults the sunna. If that contains
no ruling, then one consults the rulings of the rightly
guided caliphs [the first four successors to the
Prophet], and then the sayings of the Companions,
God be pleased with them. If none of these sources
contains a ruling, then one performs ijtihad and seeks
the closest ruling in the Qur’an, in the sunna of God’s
Messenger, God’s prayer and blessing upon him, and
in the rulings of his Companions.
“The Companions allowed this practice, they acted
on it, and they affirmed each other’s practice. It is re¬
lated from Abu ‘Ubayda [companion of the Prophet,
circa 581-639], Abu Nu'aym [religious scholar,
Isfahan, 948-1038], and Sufyan ibn ‘Uyayna [reli¬
gious scholar, Hijaz, died circa 813] that ‘Umar ibn
al-Khattab [companion of the Prophet and second
caliph, 634-644], God be pleased with him, wrote to
Abu Musa al-Ash‘ari [companion of the Prophet, died
662], ‘The office of judge is a well-established duty
and an established custom. So understand that when
litigants seek a decision on a matter that is not in the
Qur’an or the sunna, you should use analogy and know
like examples that are the basis for analogy. Then re¬
solve on what you think is most beloved to God and
what is most likely to be right.’”
Ibn al-Qayyim further wrote, “‘Umar’s instruction
to use analogy for cases not covered in the Qur’an
or the sunna is an authority for proponents of using
analogy in shari'a. They have said, ‘This letter from
‘Umar to Abu Musa was not rejected by any Com¬
panion. They agreed that rulings could be issued on
the basis of analogy. It is one of the basic principles
of the shari'a and it is indispensable for the jurispru¬
dent. God guided His servants to use it for situations
not covered by His book [the Qur’an], He compared
the second generation to the first generation in vari¬
ous places. He made the first generation the root and
the second its branch. He compared the life of the
dead after death to the life of the earth after the death
of vegetation. He compared all new creation, which
his opponents denied, to the creation of the heavens
and earth—just as the second generation followed the
first. He compared life after death to awakening after
sleep. He coined comparisons and used them in vari¬
ous instances. They are all rational comparisons by
which He instructs His servants to realize that the
ruling of something is the ruling of its like. All like¬
nesses are the bases of comparisons from which are
known the rulings of similar things. The Qur’an con¬
tains around forty examples that include the compari¬
son of a thing to its like and show that they have the
same ruling. God, be He exalted, said, ‘These are
likenesses we offer the people, but only those who
are knowledgeable understand.’ [Qur’an, Sura 29,
Verse 43] Using analogy in coining likenesses is a
property of the mind. God gave people the instinct
and the mental ability to detect similarity in two simi¬
lar objects, to reject the notion that they are dissimi¬
lar, to distinguish between two different objects, and
to reject the notion they are similar. It is said that the
axis of inferential reasoning in its entirety involves
equating similar objects and keeping separate differ¬
ent objects.”
It is well known that ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib [the
Prophet’s son-in-law and fourth caliph] and Zayd ibn
Thabit [a companion of the Prophet] used analogy
for determining inheritance in the case of a grandfa¬
ther and brothers. ‘Ali likened their relationship to a
torrent from which there branch out tributaries, then
tributaries of tributaries. Zayd compared their rela¬
tionship to a tree from which a limb branches off, and
then limbs of limbs. Their view was that the grand¬
father does not preclude the brothers from inheriting.
[‘Abdullah] Ibn ‘Abbas [619-686] compared molars
to fingers and said, “Take them as an example of a
comparison.” Muhammad ibn al-Hasan [al-Shaybani,
Hanafi scholar, circa 750-805] said, “Whoever
knows the Book and the sunna, the sayings of the
186 Jamal al-Din al-Qasimi
Companions of the Messenger (God’s peace and
blessing upon him and his family), and the findings
of the Muslim jurisprudents—they are able to per¬
form ijtihad on whatever new situation may arise, and
they may judge accordingly, and practice accordingly
in their prayer, fasting, pilgrimage, and indeed any
religious duty or prohibition. If they perform ijtihad
and study the case, comparing the case at hand to its
most similar analogue, and they are unable to act on
this, or if they err, they must say so.”
The Imam al-Haramayn [the Imam of Mecca and
Medina, that is, Abu’l-Ma‘ali al-Juwayni, 1028-
1085] said, “The basic issue in this matter is the
hadith [saying of the Prophet] related by Mu‘adh [ibn
Jabal, companion of the Prophet died 627], God be
pleased with him, and reported by [hadith collectors]
Abu Da’ud [al-Sijistani, died 889], [Abu ‘Isa
Muhammad] al-Tirmidhi [died 892], and [Ahmad ibn
al-Husayn] al-Bayhaqi [994—1066]. The hadith con¬
cerns the time when the Prophet, God’s blessings and
peace be upon him, wanted to send Mu‘adh to
Yemen. The Prophet said to him, ‘How would you
act as judge?’ He said, ‘I would judge by God’s
book. ’ The Prophet then said, ‘And if you do not find
a ruling in God’s book?’ He said, ‘By the surma of
God’s Messenger.’ The Prophet then said, ‘And if
you do not find it there?’ He said, ‘I would perform
ijtihad and spare no effort,’ and he struck his chest.
Muhammad said, ‘Praise God to give success to the
messenger of the Messenger of God, as he has
pleased the Messenger of God.’ This hadith may not
come from either of the two major canonical hadith
collections [those of al-Bukhari, died 870, and Mus¬
lim ibn al-Hajjaj, died 875], but it is rated as sound
in another collection. It is sound indeed. Al-Hafiz Ibn
Hajar [al-‘Asqalani, Egyptian religious scholar,
1372-1449] wrote, ‘Abu al-‘Abbas [al-Tabari] Ibn
al-Qass [jurist, died circa 946] relied in establishing
the soundness of a hadith on studying with the lead¬
ers of jurisprudence and ijtihad, and he said that this
is sufficient to dispense with rote learning of hadiths
from specialists.’”
From this hadith it may be gleaned that the Law¬
giver determined the mujtahid’ s [method of] ruling.
It is one of God’s laws by His decree. [Muhyi al-Din]
Ibn ‘Arabi [Iberian religious scholar, 1165-1240]
refers to this: “All of the mujtahids have a firm foot¬
hold in the prophetic heritage and are the heirs of the
prophets in deriving specific regulations. But they do
not possess the law, because if it were not for the
materia] which the Lawgiver gave them from His law,
they would not be able to derive laws.”
Part Four On the necessity of ijtihad about
new occurrences; that the way to
know them is by ijtihad, not taqlid
[imitation of a leading religious scholar].
In every age novel occurrences must inevitably
come under some ruling. Whoever is asked about
them must issue a legal opinion after striving to the
utmost to reach the proper decision. It is well known
that a religious judge either belongs to a particular
legal school or is independent (as I explained at
length in my book, The Legal Opinion in Islam). Al-
Ghazzali wrote, “It is agreed that if one exhausts
ijtihad, and a particular ruling appears to be correct,
then one is not allowed to follow its contrary, act
on any other opinion, and abandon one’s own opin¬
ion. But if one has not yet undertaken ijtihad and
has not studied the matter, and if one is incapable
of ijtihad —as commoners are—then he may resort
to taqlid. There is disagreement, however, as to
whether a scholar capable of ijtihad must perform
it, or if he is permitted to imitate somebody else,
even if the scholar has researched an issue, studied
the evidence in order to reach an independent opin¬
ion, and is not deficient in learning.” The Judge [al-
Ghazzali] chose to forbid a scholar from imitating
anyone else. He felt this was appropriate, and he
cited as evidence the Qur’anic passages:
So take heed, O people of vision! [Sura 59, Verse 2]
Those who ponder would have known it. [Sura 4,
Verse 83]
Do they not contemplate what the Qur’an says, or
have their hearts been sealed with locks? [Sura 47,
Verse 24]
In whatever matter you disagree, the ultimate
judgment rests with God. [Sura 42, Verse 10]
If you are at variance over something, refer it to
God and the Messenger. [Sura 4, Verse 59]
“All this amounts to a command to ponder and in¬
vestigate; it is not addressed to commoners; it is ad¬
dressed only to religious scholars. The imitator aban¬
dons contemplation, reflection, and investigation.”
Al-Ghazzali goes on to say, “ Taqlid is accepting
another’s opinion with no proof; it is not a path to
knowledge in either basic legal principles or specific
regulations. Sophists claim that the path to knowing
the truth is taqlid, and that taqlid is obligatory. The
GUIDING MANKIND TO ACT
187
falseness of their view is demonstrated in a number
of ways. We oppose their opinion with the follow¬
ing passages from the Qur’an:
Do not follow that of which you have no knowledge.
[Sura 17, Verse 36]
Speak lies of God you cannot even conceive.’
[Sura 2, Verse 169]
We bear witness to only what we know. [Sura 12,
Verse 81]
Say, ‘Bring your proof.’ [Sura 1, Verse 111]
“All of this is about imitation and the command to
seek knowledge. Therefore, the ‘ulama’ have high
standing. The Qur’an says, "God will raise those of
you who believe and those who have knowledge to
high ranks.’ [Sura 58, Verse 11] Muhammad (peace
be upon him) said, ‘The men of rectitude in every
generation bear this knowledge, they banish from it
the distortions of the excessively zealous, the inter¬
pretations of the ignorant, and the presumptions of
liars. This is not attained by imitation but by knowl¬
edge.’” Thus wrote al-Ghazzali. From these words
it is known that in order to discover rulings for novel
occurrences, one must have recourse to the possess¬
ors of knowledge, namely, the mujtahids. There is
no way to know the rulings or to assure the heart on
such matters except by ijtihad, as al-Ghazzali (God
be pleased with him) stated.
24
Mansurizade Sa‘id
The Muslim Woman: Polygamy
Can Be Prohibited in Islam
Mansurizade Mehmed Sa'id (Turkey, 1864-1923) was a religious scholar and politician
whose radical ideas on polygamy and other issues caused heated debates during the second
Ottoman constitutional period (1908-1918). Bom into a family in Izmir that had pro¬
duced many 'ulama' (religious scholars), Mansurizade Sa'id followed the same path, gain¬
ing fame for his knowledge of Arabic literature and jurisprudence and serving on the
regional appeals court. He also wrote for modernist journals and newspapers, arguing
that Islam was not an obstacle to progress, and that it could be reconciled with modern¬
ization. In 1907, Mansurizade Sa'id worked with the secret Committee of Progress and
Union, and after its rise to power in the revolution of 1908, he served in various official
capacities, including negotiations with the Austro-Hungarian government over its annex¬
ation of Bosnia and Herzegovina. He also taught Muslim jurisprudence at the Law School
in Istanbul. Mansurizade Sa'id was elected to parliament twice from Saruhan and once
from Mente?e, serving from 1908 until 1918. In 1914, he was seriously considered for
the office of Shaykh al-lslam, the chief religious authority of the Ottoman Empire, but
was not appointed because of his radical religious views, which had caused an outcry in
Islamist circles. Among these views was his position that polygamy could legitimately be
banned in an Islamic country, as expressed in a series of articles excerpted here. 1
“Since polygamy is permitted in the Islamic shari'a
[religious law], Islam cannot refuse to accept po¬
lygamy.” “In Islam polygamy has to be accepted.”
“Polygamy is forbidden in other religions and na¬
tions, but in Islam its prohibition is not possible.”
“The religion of Islam is different from other reli¬
gions in regard to the issue of polygamy.” Because
of such wrong opinions and beliefs, the Islamic
shari'a has been subjected to a great deal of criticism
on the part of Europeans and civilized peoples in
general. They imagine that medieval savagery still
prevails in the Islamic world as a result of the shari ‘a.
Islamic attempts to counter this veritable flood of
negative comment serve only to strengthen the slan¬
der, calumny, and baseless accusations directed
[Mansurizade Sa'id], “Islam Kadim: Ta'addud-i Zevcat
islamiyetde Men' Olunabilir” (The Muslim Woman: Po¬
lygamy Can Be Prohibited in Islam), and “Islam Kadim:
Ta'addud-i Zevcat Munasebetiyle” (The Muslim Woman: On
Polygamy), Islam Mecmuasi (Islam Journal ), Istanbul, Ot¬
toman Empire, numbers 8 and 11, 1914, pages 233-238 and
325-330. Translation from Turkish and introduction by M.
Jjtikrii Hanioglu.
against the shari'a. These antagonists have been
carrying on their hostile propaganda on the basis of
their belief that the shari'a contains a legal doctrine
regarding polygamy. Meanwhile those who defend
Islam, seeking to preserve this doctrine, never cease
to speak of the advantages of polygamy, and to main¬
tain that it is in accordance with reason.
The disputes continue to no purpose, because not
one of the defenders of Islam has set out the true
position: that there is no preferred doctrine in the
shari'a regarding polygamy, that it is an issue left
to the discretion of the rulers, that Islam in no way
hinders the prohibition of polygamy, and that po¬
lygamy is not an issue which raises difficulties from
the viewpoint of the shari'a , or needs extensive
discussion.
1. “Mansurizade M. Said Bey,” /f ve Dttfunce ( Labor and
Thought), number 25, November-December 1959, pp. 2-3;
Mecdut Mansuroglu. “Mansurizade Sait Bey," in Ahmet
Halil, editor, “Mansuroglu Ailesi ve Kiiltur Tarihimizdeki
Hizmetleri” (The Mansuroglu Family and Their Contribution
to our Cultural History), If ve DU^iince (Labor and Thought),
number 27, January-March 1961, pp. 6-8.
188
THE MUSLIM WOMAN: POLYGAMY
189
Let us then set out a truth which is accepted by
the founders of all the [four Sunni] schools of law
and by the jurists at large, one which cannot conceiv¬
ably be doubted, since it stems, as I will explain, from
a revealed text.
It is this: the verse “obey God and the Messenger
and those in authority among you” [Qur’an, Sura 4,
Verse 59] commands absolute obedience to the
authorities.
This verse states that the authorities should be
obeyed regardless of what they order or prohibit.
Since the verse does not mention any restriction con¬
cerning the matters in which the authorities should
be obeyed, it follows that, as explained in the relevant
science, this is an ordinance of unrestricted applica¬
tion, and it is thus to be understood that it is obliga¬
tory to obey the authorities in whatever they order
or prohibit. Thus the ordinance we learn from this
verse is unrestricted and unconditional.
There is, however, a point to be made here. It
would indeed seem logical to say that the fact that
the ordinance is unconditional means that even if the
authorities go against shari ‘a , prohibiting things it
commands and ordering things it prohibits, it is still
necessary to obey the authorities. And yet it is im¬
possible to imagine any law at all—not just the
shari'a —which would disregard its own commands
and prohibitions in this way, and enjoin obedience
to commands and prohibitions which contradict
them. Is it to abandon its own demands and impose
conformity to demands that are incompatible with
them? Suppose that the authorities give the order,
“Do not obey the Lawgiver [God].” In such a case,
how could it be a duty imposed by the shari ‘a to obey
the authorities? Would not the shari'a have been
voided altogether?
Thus it is obviously necessary to supplement the
unconditional command to obey the authorities,
which the verse contains, by adding as a condition
that the commands and prohibitions of the Lawgiver
must not be violated. But limiting the scope of the
text in this way means establishing an exception to
the unconditional character of the ordinance, an ex¬
ception which specifies that one should not obey
when the command of the authorities contradict com¬
mands and prohibitions of the shari'a. Thus it could
be objected that such an exception, which seems to
contradict texts but in reality is laid down by texts,
is not established by scholarly opinion based upon
personal judgment and analogical reasoning. One
cannot resort to opinion in the face of a text; on is¬
sues pertaining to texts, there is no place for ijtihad
[interpretation].
An exception of this kind is established by self-
evident reason and necessity; it is in the nature of a
narrowing of the scope on the basis of reason. While
it is impermissible to limit the scope of texts by re¬
course to scholarly opinion, it can be done on the
basis of reason. When the legal theorists enumerate
ways in which the scope of texts can be limited, they
mention reason as the first of them. In sum, reason
is one thing, and scholarly opinion is another. The
scope of texts can be limited through reason, but not
through scholarly opinion, because on issues where
there is a text, there is no place for such opinion.
Thus, in the view of the jurists, limiting the scope
of the verse and explaining the ex ception to it mean
that if the authorities order the contrary of something
that is obligatory according to shari'a, or order the
performance of something that is forbidden by
shari'a , in short if they go against the orders and
prohibitions of shari'a, then there is no duty to obey
them.
The reason is that if the authorities are obeyed in
such a matter, then the Lawgiver is being disobeyed,
and this is sin. The Prophet has staled that “no obe¬
dience is due to a creature in a matter involving dis¬
obedience to the Creator.”
Thus on this question of obedience to the authori¬
ties, the views of the jurists and opinions of the
schools are unanimous. We encounter neither dis¬
agreement among the schools nor clashes of opinion.
This is because, as I have explained, this is an
issue that is fully resolved on the basis of reason and
revelation.
Because ijtihad is not permissible on issues where
there is a text, there is no place for it in the face of
such a clear-cut text; in the same way, there is no
possibility of opposing self-evident reason. In sum,
it is established by clear evidence of reason and reve¬
lation that it is a duty to obey all the orders of the
authorities regardless of what they are, subject to the
condition that these must not contravene the shari'a.
If, however, they contravene the orders and prohibi¬
tions of the shari'a, then according to the shari'a it
is not permissible to obey them. Of these two judg¬
ments, the first rests on revelation, and the second
on reason. Both of them, as I have explained, are
incontrovertible ordinances free of any dispute or
disagreement.
190 Mansurizade Sa‘id
From this it follows that it is a duty to obey all
orders or prohibitions of the authorities in matters
regarding which the shari'a neither commands nor
forbids—things that are neither obligatory' nor for¬
bidden, but simply licit. This is because in such cases
the authorities are not ordering the omission of an
obligatory act or the performance of a prohibited act.
Thus this ordinance is free of any doubt or uncer¬
tainty; and it is the unambiguous sense of the text.
No disagreement among the schools or conflict of
scholarly opinion can take place regarding the mean¬
ing of such texts.
Accordingly the authorities have broad power to
issue orders and prohibitions on all matters regard¬
ing which the shari'a takes no stand, a power that is
not subject to limitation.
Since, as I have explained, the authorities have no
authority to prohibit something obligatory or com¬
mand something prohibited, if their authority in such
permissible issues were denied, they would be left
with no authority according to the shari'a to order
or prohibit anything, and the verse would have no
force or meaning.
The shari'a grants to the authorities a power so
great that it considers their commands and prohibi¬
tions tantamount to its own. If the authorities order
something, then their orders have the force of a legal
obligation just like commands of the shari'a. Simi¬
larly, if they prohibit something, this will become
something prohibited under the shari'a. It decrees
that anything that the authorities prohibit becomes
prohibited by the shari ‘a, because the shari ‘a decrees
that obeying the authorities is a duty.
Thus the shari'a reinforces the commands and
prohibitions of the authorities. Can any greater au¬
thority be imagined?
Had the authorities not been empowered by the
shari'a to order and prohibit, the shari ‘a would have
voided rather than confirmed their [right to] com¬
mand and prohibit—just as it decrees, as I have ex¬
plained, that if the authorities ban something com¬
manded by the shari'a or order an act which is
prohibited by it, this will not be valid; it voids such
orders and prohibitions of the authorities.
In sum, it is an established, indubitable, and in¬
convertible fact that the authorities have a wide au¬
thority in ordering or prohibiting within the general
category of licit things; this rule has no exceptions,
and cannot be restricted in any way. This authority
is based upon an unambiguous legal text.
Now polygamy is precisely something which is
neither commanded nor prohibited in the shari ‘a, and
which is simply declared to be licit by the [Qur’anic]
verse that states, “Marry the women who please you,
two, three, or four.” [Sura 4, Verse 3]
The authorities, that is to say the government, thus
have full power to prohibit polygamy outright or to
subject it to certain conditions. As I have explained,
there is no obstacle to this in the shari'a, since in the
view of shari'a the authorities have a wide power to
issue orders or prohibitions and to legislate, in mat¬
ters that are licit. If such a law were to be issued, the
shari'a would confirm rather than invalidate it, since
it would be an order issued by the authorities. The
ordinances of the shari'a on polygamy would then
be neither more nor less than the contents of this law.
It is the same with marriage and divorce. As with
polygamy, there exists no command or prohibition
of the shari'a regarding them, and only their permis¬
sibility is specified. Thus it is beyond any doubt that,
in the eyes of the shari'a, the authorities have full
power to make laws which accord with the com¬
munity’s general moral values regarding these issues.
It is also worth mentioning that some of those who
discuss the subject of polygamy want to resolve the
question by arguing that according to the shari'a
polygamy is conditional on fairness [in the treatment
of co-wives], which is impossible to achieve; there¬
fore, they say, it is necessary to ban polygamy by
making a law against it.
It is indeed true that fairness is unattainable in
polygamy, and that it is therefore necessary to pro¬
hibit it by law. It appears, however, that the shari'a
does not countenance such a solution, since it explic¬
itly declares polygamy to be licit. Thus no resolution
is to be found in this line of argument. The discus¬
sion goes on and on, and the shari'a continues to be
criticized.
Thus there is nothing to be gained in the face of
such an imaginary prohibition by saying that fairness
cannot be attained in polygamy, and that it is there¬
fore necessary to prevent it by making a law against
it. The reason is that if the prohibition conflicts with
what is allowed, the prohibition prevails. This is not
only one of the basic principles of jurisprudence but
is also in accord with the demands of reason and the
fundamental law of nature. Thus as long as the pro¬
hibition actually exists, that which is allowed can¬
not be implemented or have any effect. Therefore, as
I stated at the outset, it is necessary to explain that
THE MUSLIM WOMAN: POLYGAMY
191
there is no such prohibition in the shari'a , and it is
simply imaginary. The issue of fairness is of second¬
ary importance, and it would merely be one reason
for the law, among others.
[. . .] The issue of the prohibition of polygamy in
Islam is essentially a straightforward matter; it is not
something invented by me on the basis of my own
scholarly opinion, as [Babanzade] Ahmed Na'im Bey
[1872-1934] maintains. It is something that neces¬
sarily follows the principles of jurisprudence and a
very explicit verse. So much so that the time has long
come to show the real face of the shari ‘a in relation
to an issue which has been covered with the dark veil
of ignorance and fanaticism for many years, and
which at the same time has generated endless and
fruitless debates. [. ..]
If it is objected that a law prohibiting polygamy
would not serve the public interest, this would raise
a different issue. Our aim here is simply to point out
that it is within the powers granted to the authorities
by the shari‘a to make laws regarding matters which
are licit, when there is a public interest in doing so. It
is also worth mentioning that, while the fundamental
rational principle that “the discretionary power of the
ruler may only be used beneficially” does restrict the
broad power of the authorities in ordering and prohib¬
iting to a certain degree, there is nevertheless no doubt
that this restriction is of the type discussed in my origi¬
nal article. That is to say, it is a restriction arising from
reason, and not from scholarly opinion.
Thus there is no conflict of opinion or scholarly
disagreement concerning the scope of the verse.
There is only the arrogant and stubborn clamor of
ignorance and fanaticism arising from the panic at the
prospect that this could make it possible to prohibit
polygamy. The verse is quite explicit and unequivo¬
cal. No jurists resorting to their own opinion, no
commentators on the Qur’an, can restrict or limit the
verse in question. [...]
25
Ziya Gokalp
Islam and Modern Civilization
Ziya Gokalp (Turkey, 1876-1924) was a founder of Turkish nationalism. Encouraged by
his father, an admirer of Namik Kemal (see chapter 17) and other modernists, he sought
both Western and Islamic educations. The tension he experienced between the two led
to a suicide attempt in 1894, and Gokalp lived with a bullet in his brain until his death. In
1898, he was arrested for his contacts with the Young Turk opposition, spent a year in
prison, and was restricted to his home town of Diyar-i Bekir, where he served in minor
government positions and, according to his own account, read hundreds of books in French
on sociology, psychology, and philosophy. Following the Constitutional Revolution of 1908,
he quickly became an important figure in the Committee of Union and Progress. In 1912,
he was elected to parliament from Ergani Madeni and turned down the post of minister
of education; in 19 13, he became a professor of sociology at the University of Istanbul
and taught sociology at a modern-style religious school, the Daru'l-Hilafeti'l-Aliye. In ad¬
dition, he published widely, applying theories of idealism to Ottoman society, In his most
famous articles, such as one presented here, Gokalp promoted the "Turkification,
Islamification, and modernization" of the Ottoman Empire. In 1919, following the Otto¬
man defeat in World War I, he was court-martialed as one of the leaders of the Com¬
mittee of Union and Progress, and exiled to Malta for two years. On his return, he re¬
sumed his writing and was elected to parliament from Diyar-i Bekir. 1
In one of our previous essays we have put forth the
thesis that Islam and modern civilization are compat¬
ible. There are two possible procedures to verify this
thesis: the first is to compare the foundations of Islam
with those of modern civilization directly; the sec¬
ond is to enquire whether the points of incompatibil¬
ity or agreement between Christianity and modern
civilization present favorable or unfavorable impli¬
cations for Islam. Here we shall first follow the sec¬
ond course, because it will show us that to the ex¬
tent to which Christianity remained remote from the
principles of Islam, it failed to reconcile itself with
modem civilization, and that it was able to reconcile
itself with modern civilization only to the extent to
which it approached [the principles of] Islam.
There is strong evidence for the argument that
Islam is the most modem religion and in no way con¬
flicting with modem science.
The first reason for the existence of a fundamen¬
tal opposition between Christianity and Islam
should be sought in the social conditions existing
at the time of their rise. Christianity originated
within a community that was under the domination
of a powerful state and that had no hopes for politi¬
cal independence. Islam, on the other hand, flour¬
ished among a people free from external domina¬
tion who had the capacity to establish an independent
Ziya Gokalp, “Islam and Modern Civilization,” in Turkish
Nationalism and Western Civilization; Selected Essays of
Ziya Gokalp , translated from Turkish by Niyazi Berkes (Lon¬
don: George Allen and Unwin, 1959), pp. 214-223. First
published in 1917. Introduction by M. §ukni Hanioglu.
1. Uriel Heyd, Foundations of Turkish Nationalism: The
Life and Teachings of Ziya Gokalp (London: Luzac & Com¬
pany, 1950): Ali Niizhet, Ziya Goka/p'in Hayati ve Malta
Mektuplari (Ziya Gokalp's Life and Malta Letters ) (Istanbul,
Turkey: ikbal Kiituphanesi, 1931); §evket Beysanoglu,
Dogumu 'nun 80. Yildoniimii Munasebetiyle Ziya Gokalp ’in Ilk
Yazt Hayati, 1894—1909 (Ziya Gokalp's Early Life as a Writer,
1894-1909. on the Occasion of the 80th Anniversary of His
Birth (Istanbul. Turkey: Diyarbakiri Tanitma Demegi Yayiru.
1956); Riza Karda$, “Ziya Gokalp,” in Islam Ansiklopedisi ( En¬
cyclopedia of Islam) (Istanbul, Turkey: Maarif Matbaasi,
1988), volume 13, pp. 579-617; Cavit Orhan Tiitengil, Ziya
Gokalp Sosyolojisinin Tetnel llkeleri (The Foundations of Ziya
Gokalp’s Sociology ) (Ankara, Turkey: Kultiir ve Turizm
Bakanhgi Yayinlart, 1987); Hilmi Ziya Ulken, Ziya Gokalp
(Ziya Gokalp ) (Istanbul. Turkey: Kanaat Kitabevi, 1939).
192
ISLAM AND MODERN CIVILIZATION
i 93
state, although they lacked such an organization at
the time. “State” means a public authority which has
the power to enforce its judicial rules over the in¬
dividuals whose safety it undertakes. At the time of
the rise of Christianity, the Roman state and its laws
were in force. Christianity found a political orga¬
nization already in existence, and thus it took the
matters of organizing a government and maintain¬
ing laws as matters outside the concern of religion.
It accepted the separation of state and religion as a
principle, and formulated it in the slogan “render
unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and unto God
that which is God’s.” Thus, Christianity seems at
first sight like a religion that has left judicial pow¬
ers entirely to the government and has concerned
itself exclusively with pronouncements on matters
of righteousness and ethical teachings.
The real nature of things, however, was not that
way at all. Christianity, by accepting the state out¬
side of religion, was relegating the state to a non-
sacred realm. It did not appropriate the state to itself
because it looked down on it. This attitude, originally
due to the fact that the Romans were foreign to the
early Christians both from the point of view of na¬
tionality and of religion, did not disappear altogether
even when the conditions changed. Although Chris¬
tianity took on political government outside of the
realm of religion, it nevertheless brought to the world
a new government under the name of Heavenly King¬
dom. Thus, two kinds of government came into ex¬
istence in Christendom, one as the non-sacred, tem¬
poral government, and the other as the sacred,
spiritual government. If Christianity had not found
an already existing order of state at the time of its
birth, it would have attempted undoubtedly to cre¬
ate one, and then it would have regarded it as a sa¬
cred being of its own creation. As this government
would have been within the religion and, as such, a
sacred institution, no need would have been felt to
establish a spiritual government. If this had hap¬
pened, there would be no duality of temporal and
spiritual governments but, rather, something similar
to the case existing in Islam.
Europeans who have compared Christianity and
Islam usually believe that Islam’s acceptance of ju¬
dicial matters as part of religion, and of the state or¬
ganization as part of religious organization, is a de¬
fect in Islam. Even some Muslims who have received
their ideas from the same sources think the same way.
However, when the problem is investigated more
carefully, it appears that this is not a defect but, on
the contrary, a merit.
In Islam, religious provisions are divided into
three categories—those relating to piety, to moral¬
ity, and to judicial affairs. All of them are religious
because they are sacred. Religion is the sum total of
all beliefs that are taken as sacred by an umma [reli¬
gious community]. Aesthetic and rational rules are
non-sacred, and therefore they are outside of religion.
Islam takes ethical and legal rules as religious rules
and thus makes them sacred. This conception is con¬
trary to the interpretations of ethics and law from the
point of view of utilitarianism, historical materialism,
and the doctrine of social contract. Over against
these points of view, it attributes to them a supra-
individual, sacred, and transcendental character.
Modem sociology entirely justifies and confirms this
point of view of Islam.
Although Islam brings everything sacred under
religion, at the same time it divides them into three
categories, ascribing to each a different sanction. The
sanctions of the rules of piety are otherworldly sanc¬
tions; those of the judicial rules, legal sanctions; and
of the ethical rules, the sanctions of ‘«>/[community
mores]. In Islam, which commands in accordance
with ma’ruf [the good] and prohibits in accordance
with munkar [evil], criteria of ethical rules are ‘urf.
All the investigations of modern sociology have but
confirmed the same thing.
When Christianity accepted the need for a spiritual
government, it did not take it as a mere metaphysical
expression. This government, although spiritual,
would not content itself with a mere spiritual sanc¬
tion; it would also demand a material sanction. Islam
believed in the existence of a supreme court in the
Hereafter, where the accounts of piety of our actions
would be settled. Christianity, in its attempts to sup¬
port its spiritual government by a material sanction,
went much farther by bringing that court into this
world and institutionalizing it, in the Middle Ages,
in the so-called courts of inquisition. In Islam, the
maxim “ shari'a [religious law] decides for zahir
[outward appearance]” is well known. The spiritual
courts of Christianity extended their penetrating in¬
quisitiveness to the realm of the inner private con¬
science of man and attempted to measure the faith
of persons. But the spiritual government was com¬
posed not only of these courts. It also had its coun¬
cils, which were a sort of parliament legislating laws
on matters of piety and making ecclesiastical laws.
194 Ziya Gokalp
As politics is based on national sentiments per¬
ceived by men of action through experience, the rule
of the majority in political matters may be an ad¬
equate basis. On these matters the opinions of the
experienced ignorant may, in many cases, be better
than those given by inexperienced learned persons.
Thus, in politics, the fact that the learned are few and
the ignorant many may not be an obstacle to the rule
of the majority. Matters of piety, on the other hand,
are entirely matters of learning and specialization.
Thus, it is not permissible to decide matters of piety
on the basis of the rule of the majority in such Coun¬
cils, and to make such decisions obligatory. The
opinion of the majority cannot be binding on mat¬
ters of piety, just as it cannot be on questions of sci¬
ence. The majority commits few mistakes on politi¬
cal matters, and no great harm proceeds from them.
On matters of piety, on the other hand, the error is
greater and its consequences for otherworldly salva¬
tion are more dangerous. For this reason, Islam never
constituted any Council and never made enactments
on any matter of faith or worship on the basis of
majority opinion, as if this were issued as law. The
Councils did not content themselves with promulgat¬
ing beliefs and prayers in the form of laws, but they
issued laws providing earthly punishments for mat¬
ters of conscience, forgetting that only the sublime
court of the Hereafter can do this. As spiritual pub¬
lic authority was vested in the Councils and in the
Papacy, the decrees of the latter were regarded as
binding when the Councils were not in session. The
interpretations of the popes were infallible, like those
of the decrees of the Councils. The meaning of the
Islamic saying “Ijtihad [rational interpretation] does
not abrogate ijtihad” will be understood better when
we compare it with the idea of infallibility of the
popes and Councils, which may abrogate all opin¬
ions of the learned. In Islam, the fatwa [religious
ruling] issued by a certain office does not prevent the
muftis [religious officials] from issuing fatwas in
accordance with their own opinions. The hadith [tra¬
dition of the Prophet] saying, “Consult yourself, et
cetera,” shows how wide are the limits of the free¬
dom of ijtihad in Islam. The acceptance of the
maxim, “ Ijtihad does not abrogate ijtihad ,” does not
mean that a judicial decision does not abrogate oth¬
ers. A judicial decision abrogates another act of a
court, but one ifta' [ruling] does not abrogate another
ifta The Shari‘a Examination Board [an Ottoman
institution] abrogates the decisions of the shar' [re¬
ligious law] courts by cassation, and the qadis
[judges] as delegates of the caliph, are under the
obligation of following what the caliph has decreed
on those matters which are subject to ijtihad. The
muftis , on the other hand, do not have to make their
ifta’ s within such limitations. In Christianity the
“muftis” have to follow the “ fatwas ” of the pope or
of the Councils. In the Greek Orthodox Church, too,
the decrees of the Holy Synod have the authority of
a kind of ifta ’ in a similar manner. In Islam, any per¬
son who has the qualifications to ifta ' has the right
to exercise it, but no one may ever have the same
authority on the basis of position. Only Revelation
is the authority behind the ifta’.
Islam’s inclusion of judicial provisions into the
provisions of religion, and its acceptance of the sa¬
credness of the state, is not a shortcoming but a merit,
for if it had seen government and law as profane and
secular institutions, it would have invented a spiri¬
tual government such as we find in Christianity. It
was because Islam did otherwise that organizations
having a spiritual authority or the authority to issue
decrees on matters of faith, such as Councils, Holy
Synods, Inquisition courts, and ecclesiastical courts,
were not established in it. Islam did not establish
institutions contrary to the laws of nature and life,
such as a priesthood. It was because Islam had
brought state, law, and court into the realm of the
sacred that those traits such as loyalty to the secular
ruler, a genuine fraternity and solidarity among the
believers, sacrifice of interests and life for the sake
of jihad [holy struggle], tolerance and respect to¬
wards the opinions of others, which are the very basis
of a permanent order in society, were cultivated
among all Muslims as common virtues.
Let us now look at the modes of relation between
spiritual and temporal governments, and the differ¬
ences existing between these and the regime accepted
in Islam.
These modes of relations may be reduced to four
basic regimes: The first form is what we may call
Papalism, which is based on the universal authority
of the popes. In this form, all authority on matters of
both piety and politics are combined in the office of
papacy. According to this system, Christian ecclesi¬
astical sovereigns in general, such as bishops, are
subject to the authority of the pope. Gregory VII
[pope, 1073-1085] had said: “Why should not the
papacy, having acquired the right of leadership in
ISLAM AND MODERN CIVILIZATION
195
spiritual matters, also acquire the right to conduct
temporal affairs? Temporal powers may see the glo¬
ries of sovereignty higher than those of the bishops.
The differences between the two will be understood
by looking at their origins. Rulership is the product
of the vanity of man, while the bishopric is the insti¬
tution of God.” Long before these words were ut¬
tered, Saint Ambrose [bishop, 339-397] had declared
that the superiority of the bishop over the ruler is like
the superiority of gold over silver. These declarations
from the authorities suffice to expound the Catholic
view on the matter.
The second form is Caesaro-Papism. This form,
which existed in Russia, means that the ruler has the
functions of papacy. Since the end of the sixteenth
century, the Muscovy patriarchs, supported by the
Russian episcopates, severed themselves from the
Patriarchate of Constantinople, and since then they
began to get supreme power into their hands, which
caused the tsars some concern. Consequently, at a
Council which convened at Moscow in 1666, Nikon
[1605-1681] was dismissed from his office. How¬
ever, this defeat did not stop the successors of Nikon
from following the older policy. Finally, in 1720,
Peter the Great [tsar, 1682-1725] declared himself
the head of the Russian Church and put an end to the
ambitious aims of the patriarchs. The next year Peter
assembled a Holy Synod composed of archbishops,
bishops, and archimandrites. The Holy Synod was
headed by the tsar, the members were appointed, and
decisions were ratified by him to be enforced. Thus,
the tsar became an absolute ruler in religion over
matters of faith, worship, and discipline.
This regime disrupted the safe conduct of both
political and religious affairs. In accordance with po¬
litical considerations, tsars could intervene in the foun¬
dations of religion by forcing the Holy Synod to issue
decrees contrary to the provisions of religion. They
thus arrested social progress and prevented political
and social innovations, by utilizing men of religion,
who became their most loyal instruments, in their at¬
tempts to keep people under their absolute rule. How¬
ever, that was the result of the efforts to find a remedy
against the principles of Christianity which were unfa¬
vorable to the establishment of an independent gov¬
ernment. The Russians could establish an independent
state only by accepting the papacy of the tsars.
The third system is the concordate system. The
relation between temporal and spiritual governments
found a solution in the Orthodox Church in the form
of a harmful but durable system, while in Catholi¬
cism it remained in constant anarchy. Popes used to
claim authority over political matters, and the rulers
declined to accept such claims because just as reli¬
gion cannot recognize a power above itself neither
can the state. In the Orthodox Church, religion was
sacrificed for the sake of the state. In Roman Catholi¬
cism, on the other hand, popes wanted to sacrifice
the state for the sake of religion, and sought as vic¬
ars of God to become the rulers of the rulers over the
earth, following the ancient Roman Caesars. When
the temporal rulers were powerful, they rejected such
a condition of dependence, which is contrary to the
nature of state, and issued decrees about the limits
of this authority of the bishops within their territo¬
ries. When the popes realized that they were unable
to curb the powers of the kings, they began to nego¬
tiate with them, trying to conclude concordats that
would be in their own favor as far as possible. But
these concordats were never made sincerely. The
popes accepted them only temporarily in order to
regain once again complete jurisdiction under a fa¬
vorable situation. They even did not conceal their
belief that these concordats were unilateral only, and
that they were not binding on the Church. The his¬
tory of Europe is full of such concordats, continu¬
ously changing and always dragging both sides into
conflicts.
The fourth system is the separation of the state
from the Church. The impossibility of maintaining
the relationship between the state and the Church
under the concordat regime was realized at last in
France, and the French Parliament [after the revolu¬
tion of 1789] decided to separate these two powers
from each other completely. From that time on,
France did not have an official religion, and the
churches ceased to have any official character. They
would be just private associations under the Statute
of Associations. Thus, the state became completely
laicized and religion unofficial. Although this has
been a grave source of sickness for the French na¬
tion, it was nevertheless a necessary consequence of
Catholicism.
The only natural consequence of the conflict of
Christianity with the political government could be
either Caesaro-Papism or laicism. The ideal [of the
universal authority] of the “popes” has been realized
only in Tibet. But this was due to a tricky measure
of the Chinese government. In the first century of the
hijra [the exodus of Muslims from Mecca in 622 that
196 Ziya Gokalp
marks the beginning of the Islamic calendar], the
kingdom of Tibet had conquered a great portion of
China and Turkistan and had established a great
empire. The Chinese succeeded in expelling the Ti¬
betan king by encouraging the Dalai Lamas [Tibetan
Buddhist religious leaders] and supporting them with
military forces. From that time on, Dalai Lamas re¬
mained in Tibet as absolute sovereigns; but the Ti¬
betan people came to their present state of backward¬
ness under such a government.
The above explanations show that Christianity is
irreconcilable with a modem state. Let us now look
at Islam from that point of view. In Islam, both state
and law are within religion. The provisions of reli¬
gion comprise judicial rules and prescriptions of piety.
The execution of judicial functions are given to the
caliph. The faqihs [Islamic legal scholars] proven to
be qualified as muftis are charged with the task of
purveying the provisions of piety. They are under the
judicial authority of the caliphs but are not bound in
their ifta’s by the latter’s opinions. Qadis are dele¬
gates of the caliph and exercise their judicial func¬
tions as his deputies and, thus, on the matters which
are subject to ijtihad they are bound to follow the
judgment preferred by the caliphs, even if this judg¬
ment is not in accord with the ifta ’, or even if it is
beyond the opinions of any of the four schools of fiqh
[Islamic jurisprudence], because the caliph’s opin¬
ion and decree is “to be carried out judicially” and,
as such, it is of the nature of law, whereas any opin¬
ion which is to be carried out as ifta ’ is not of a legal
nature.
There are, for example, several judgments given
as ifta’s in the fiqhs of the Shafi’i, Maliki, and
Hanbali schools [three of the four main Sunni legal
schools], which the muftis of these schools follow in
their ifta ’s. In the Ottoman lands, on the other hand,
the qadis judged only according to the Hanaft fiqh
[the fourth legal school]. Thus, only the pronounce¬
ments of the Hanaft fiqh were judicially followed and
had assumed the nature of law; those of the other
three schools remained subject to ifta Furthermore,
the Ottoman caliphate had accepted only five of the
books of fatwa of the Hanafi school as subject to
judicial application, and the qadis judged only on the
basis of these. But even the Hanafi muftis were not
under any obligation to restrict themselves to these
five books of fatwa. The codification of the Mecelle-
i Ahkam-i ‘Adliye [Compendium of Legal Statutes,
1876] was meant only to show the provisions to be
judicially followed by the qadis, and not to be pro¬
visions followed in ifta’s of muftis.
It follows from these considerations that muftis are
absolutely free and independent in declaring the pro¬
visions of piety, although they are dependent upon
the ruler or the caliph, because the caliph, although
having judicial authority, lacks any authority over
matters of piety such as the Catholic pope or the
Russian tsar enjoyed. However, the mufti does not
have any authority over matters of piety either. The
mufti only has the authority of ifta ’, simply because
of his competence in learning. There is a great dif¬
ference between “authority” and “competence.”
Thus, the judicial right belongs exclusively to the
caliph, since he has judicial authority. But the ifta ’
authority of the mufti does not give the right of ifta'
to him exclusively. There is no question of a right of
ifta ’; there is only the question of competence in ifta
The fact that the mufti has no authority over matters
of piety shows that there is no ifta ’ government of
the muftis in addition to the judicial government of
the caliphs. There is only one government in Islam,
which is the caliph’s government. Thus, the caliph
is entirely independent in his judicial government;
and the mufti is equally independent in teaching and
declaring the provisions of piety. Neither do judicial
provisions obstruct the safe application of the pro¬
visions of piety, nor do the latter intrude into the safe
course of the judiciary.
In one of our previous essays, we have shown that
qada’ [judgeship] and ifta’ cannot be united in one
office. But there are exceptions to this rule. There was
no harm in their unification in the Prophet Muham¬
mad’s person. He was in a position which would not
confuse the two, because, in addition to these two
functions, he had the function of risala [prophetic
mission] also. Whenever he failed in either of the first
two, revelation corrected him.
In a secondary form, ifta’ and qada may unite in
the caliph, because the qadis who are the caliph's
delegates have to follow his opinion. If the qadi is
dependent in his judicial action and independent in
his capacity as mufti , he will be in a difficult posi¬
tion. What will happen if his opinion does not agree
with the caliph’s opinion? Therefore, it would be
strange for him to exercise his ifta ’ according to his
own opinion after judging the contrary opinion of the
caliph. Furthermore, judicial provisions have been
compromised with certain exigencies under legal
casuistry. When the qadi follows them, and when he
ISLAM AND MODERN CIVILIZATION
197
acts as a sort of judiciary, how can he issue a fatwa
in contradiction to it? How can he have two con¬
sciences at the same time to pronounce the same thing
both permissible and nonpermissible? The qadi may
exercise ifta ’ only if he can face these difficulties in
his position.
Let us now turn to our main topic. It has been seen
above that Islam is not contrary to a modern state,
but, on the contrary, the Islamic state means a mod¬
em state. But how did it happen that the modem states
came into existence only in Christendom?
When we study the history of Christianity, we see
that, following the Crusades [11 th— 13th centuries],
a new movement started in Europe, which was then
acquainted with Islamic culture. This movement
aimed at imitating Islamic civilization and religion.
It penetrated Europe with time, and finally culmi¬
nated in Protestantism as a new religion entirely in
contra-distinction to the traditional principles of
Christianity. This new religion rejected the priest¬
hood, and the existence of two kinds of government,
spiritual and temporal. It also rejected the papacy, the
Councils, the Inquisition—in short, all institutions
which had existed in Christianity—as contrary to the
principles of Islam. Are we not justified if we look
at this religion as a more or less Islamicized form of
Christianity? The modem state came into existence
in Europe first in the Protestant countries. The con¬
stitutional regime appeared in England, the first
nation-state was established in the United States, and
the first culture-state came into existence in Ger¬
many. The racialist sociologists would believe that
the superiority in civilization of these nations and of
the Scandinavian nations was due to the fact that
these nations belonged to the Germanic and Anglo-
Saxon races. The sociologists of religion, on the other
hand, believe that the decline of the Latin nations was
due to their Catholicism, the backwardness of the
Russians was a consequence of their Orthodoxy, and
the progress of the Anglo-Saxon nations was the re¬
sult of the fact that they had freed themselves from
the Catholic traditions and approached the principles
of Islam. If these principles taken by Protestantism
from Islam were factors in this progress, do they not
also constitute an experimental proof that Islam is the
most modern and most reasonable religion? This
being so, how is the attempt of the statesmen of
Tanzimat [Ottoman administrative reforms of the
19th century] to organize the Islamic community in
imitation of the [minority] “communities” existing
in our country justifiable? Christian organizations
appeared in a dependent people and they might suit
only dependent “communities.” Free nations and free
states can reconcile themselves only with the insti¬
tutions of Islam, because Islam originated in a free
people who wanted to create an independent state.
26
Dzemaluddin Causevic
Letter and Response
Dzemaluddin Causevic (Bosnia, 1870-1938) was a controversial religious reformer and
educationalist. Son of a local religious leader in northwestern Bosnia, Causevic received
his early education from his father and thereafter at a Bosnian seminary school in Bihac.
At the age of seventeen, he continued his studies in Istanbul, receiving both a traditional
education and enrolling at the School of Law. Around 1900, Causevic visited Cairo, where
he met Muhammad Abduh (chapter 3) and attended his lectures for several months.
'Abduh left a lasting impression on Causevic, who always referred to the Egyptian scholar
as “Respected Teacher." Upon his return to Bosnia in 1903, Causevic began his career
as an Arabic language teacher and a member of the supreme council of the Bosnian Islamic
community. Between 1914 and 1930, he served as Reis al-Ulema, the highest-ranking
Islamic dignitary in the Kingdom of Yugoslavia. For Causevic, the key reason for the mal¬
aise of Muslim society was poor education, rooted in the pitiful state of its educational
institutions. He dedicated himself to the cause of educational reform with a missionary
zeal typical of modernist Islam. He sought to promote literacy by introducing a simpler
type of Arabic script for the Bosnian language. In 1937, he co-authored a Bosnian trans¬
lation of the Qur'an, along with a commentary. Causevic ran into opposition from con¬
servative Muslims. As the following piece shows, the conflict spilled into a newspaper
polemic with a respected community leader from Sarajevo, who accused him of contra¬
vening Islamic ordinances regarding veiling/
[Letter from Hadzi Mujaga Merhemic (Bosnia, 1877—
1959) to Causevic:]
Most enlightened sir!
The Majlis al-Jama‘at [Community Council] has
received your response of December 22 [ 1927] to our
letter of the 20th of the same month, via the regional
District Waqf-Ma‘arif [Endowments-Education]
Board, and has studied it with care.
First, the Majlis al-Jama‘at notes with regret that
you have failed to answer the main point of our let¬
ter, that is, concerning your statements to our press
associates, which you also confirmed by your later
statements.
The Majlis al-Jama‘at expressed its concern that
the manner in which the debate about these purely
religious issues is being relayed to the press and the
public could have very harmful consequences. Un¬
fortunately, this concern has proven to be well-
founded, and we can now see that this issue is dis¬
cussed more by the unqualified than by the
qualified, and in a way that hardly serves the inter¬
ests of the Islamic community, and is detrimental
to the issue itself. It is with regret that the Majlis
al-Jama‘at must state that you are responsible for
this issue’s having taken a direction it should never
have followed.
Furthermore, the Majlis al- Jama’at has concluded
from your response that your statements to the press,
Mehmed Dzemaluddin Causevic, “Pismo i Odgovor” (Let¬
ter and Response), Novi Behar (New Bloom), Sarajevo, Yugo¬
slavia, number 19, 1928, pp. 290-295. Translation from
Bosnian and introduction by Asim Zubcevid.
1. Enes Karic, Twentieth Century Islamic Thought in
Bosnia-Herzegovina (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina: El-
Kalem, 2001), pp. 107-224; Hfz. Mahmud Traljic, Istaknuti
Bosnjaci (Prominent Bosniaks), 2d ed. (Sarajevo, Bosnia and
Herzegovina: Rijaset, 1998), pp. 51-58; Muharem Dautovic,
Bibliografija Radova Dzemaludina CauSeviba (Bibliography
of Works by Dzemaluddin Caulevic) (Sarajevo, Bosnia and
Herzegovina: Takvim, 1998); Smail Balic, Das unbekannte
Bosnien (The Unknown Bosnia ) (Koln, Germany: Bohlau,
1992), pp. 339-344.
198
LETTER AND RESPONSE
199
and the remarks you now quote in your response, are
inconsistent for the following reasons:
1) The statements you made to the press, without
explanation or qualification, show that you favor un¬
veiling women, and are in favor of a step that cannot
be harmonized with the shari ‘a [Islamic law] injunc¬
tions that Muslims of all madhhabs [schools of Islamic
law] have upheld to this day, and to which we also
strictly adhere, and which we by no means abandon.
2) It is stated in your response that you were in¬
structed by your “Respected Teacher” [Muhammad
‘Abduh, Egypt, 1849-1905; chapter 3] how to de¬
duce legal rulings from the Qur’an, and to express
your opinion accordingly, and so you say that a
woman may go outside her home with her face un¬
veiled, even though this judgment of yours contra¬
dicts other sharVa proofs, which Sunnis can in no
way renounce, and without which they cannot sur¬
vive. This is known from the whole literature be¬
queathed to us by the early Muslims, and upon which
all of us Muslims have acted, with the exception of
some heretics.
Enlightened sir! Wc surmise from your explana¬
tion, as you say yourself, that you wish to interpret
Islam and its rules according to your own ability only,
and to impose this upon others, whereas this contra¬
venes the understanding of all mujtahids [religious
scholars], who do not accept the isolated ijtihad [in¬
terpretation] of even much greater authorities [pre¬
ferring to rely on ijma ', the consensus of authorities].
‘Ulama’ [religious scholars] throughout the Islamic
world agree that all those who engage in ijtihad —
which is restricted solely to those questions for which
there is no manifest meaning from the reigning
madhhabs —must be endowed with all the conditions
for ijtihad, which your Respected Teacher surely did
not possess, and only then may they become involved
in the interpretation of such questions as call for great
responsibility. The ‘ulama’ of Islam count these
people among the third category of jurisprudents, and
call them mujtahid fi 'l-mas ’ala [scholars permitted to
engage in ijtihad only on specific issues].
Let us take a glance at the history of legislation
and see who these people are, and what kind of
‘ulama ’ belong to this category. The ‘ulama ’ of Islam
do not find the preconditions for belonging to this
category even in the case of the famous [Ahmad ibn
‘Ali al-]Jassas [917-982], in whose shadow all the
'ulama ’ of our century, including Respected Teacher,
pale into insignificance.
Acting upon the clear meaning of the Qur’an in¬
volves great responsibility, since it requires a degree
of education that the ‘ulama ’ do not find even in
much greater authorities than those of the ‘ulama ’ of
our century.
Enlightened sir! You say you deduce that it is
permissible to unveil the face of women from Sura
24, Verses 30 and 31 [of the Qur’an], In this you cite
Jassas, taking only what suits you, and do not men¬
tion all that is in Jassas’s Ahkam al-Qur’an [Judg¬
ments of the Qur’an ]. Jassas deduces from the en¬
tirety [of sources] a ruling that a woman must be
veiled, except in most exceptional cases, from which
it by no means follows that—as you interpret it—she
can go out in the street with her face unveiled.
You say in your statements that a woman may
even go outside her home with her face unveiled
without violating the injunctions of the Qur’an. We
do not know how you have come to this conclusion.
You are aware of the fact that the five daily prayers
were obligatory in Mecca, and that the way a woman
should cover during prayer was determined at that
time. It is said here [in the Qur’anic verse just cited]
that a woman must cover everything except for her
face, hands and feet. Later on a verse to which you
refer was revealed, and which clearly states “and put
their veils” [over their bosoms] and so on. [Sura 24,
Verse 31]
If a woman is to cover everything except her
face, hands and feet according to the very first in¬
junction, what could be the legal force of the sec¬
ond verse?
Later on, yet another verse was revealed in which
it says: “draw their outer garment over them” and so
on, [Sura 33, Verse 59] from which it also follows
that something else is to be covered apart from what
has already been prescribed, so in what way do you
derive a ruling that one should remain with what was
prescribed for daily prayer?
The Noble Qur’an further says: “and do not dis¬
play your adornments, as in the days of paganism,”
[Sura 33, Verse 33] which the ‘ulama’ interpret to
mean that a woman must not show her adornments,
and if a woman’s face is not her adornment, what else
could it be? It also says in the noble verse, “and as
for elderly women” and so on to the end [of the
verse], [Sura 24, Verse 60] from which it indubita¬
bly follows that even in the case of old women who
have no prospect of marriage and cannnot awaken a
man’s desire, it is better for them to be veiled.
200 Dzemaluddin Causevic
In view of all the above-quoted verses, Jassas also
finally states in his Ahkam al-Qur’an that a woman
ought to be veiled, except during daily prayer.
Since the revelation of the verse concerning veil¬
ing, during the time of the Prophet, peace be upon
him, the Companions [of the Prophet], the Succes¬
sors [to the Companions], and to this day, women
have been veiled, which is the best proof of your
interpretation being wrong, since they surely knew
the Noble Qur’an better than you do.
Enlightened sir! On this occasion we shall men¬
tion the interpretation and understanding of this
matter by a great contemporary Islamic scholar, the
late [Mehmet] Zihni Efendi [Turkey, 1845-1913],
respected by all the ‘ulama’ of our time, as testified
by his good word and reports mentioned in it by a
great pure one, the famous [Hoca Eminefendizade]
‘Ali Haydar [Turkey, 1852-1918], and others.
This renowned Arabist, whose abilities even you
cannot deny, has a different understanding and in¬
terpretation of the Qur’an from yours. On page 113
of his work of jurisprudence, Mufarakat ve Miina-
kehat [Separations and Marriages], he says: “To say
that the face is non-intimate ( na-mahrem ), outside the
daily prayer, amounts to unpardonable error.”
This work of his was approved by the religious
officials [of the Ottoman Empire] and served as a
handbook for all higher schools until the government
of [Mustafa] Kemal Pasha [AtatUrk, leader of Tur¬
key, 1922-1938]; no one ever raised a voice against
this ruling of his, nor did anyone call him a conser¬
vative or obscurantist on account of this; rather, he
was respected and acknowledged by all, with
litterateurs calling him the Noble One of the Age,
while jurists call him the imam [religious leader] of
our time.
3) It seems from your response that you take no
account of these depraved times, but in an age when
the whole civilized world is seeking ways to restrict
female immorality, and when all the elders of other
faiths are shouting, “Cover yourself,” with your state¬
ments you unfortunately give our women, who are
at present veiled, a justification for unveiling.
Concerned about Islamic morals, the Majlis al-
Jama'at was the first to raise its voice a few years ago
and take the initative in the establishment of a com¬
mittee for the protection of morals. Although this was
your duty [as Reis al-Ulema], the Majlis al-Jama‘at
took it upon itself to found this committee with the
aim of uplifting those females who have faltered
morally. In an attempt to check the spread of immo¬
rality, the Majlis al-Jama‘at asked the Mufti [lead¬
ing religious official] of Sarajevo whether it would
be permissible to unveil women who cannot be dis¬
suaded from the immoral life in any other way, and
thus stigmatize their actions, while protecting others
who are veiled and chaste from temptation. The fatwa
[ruling] from the Mufti was that even such women
must not unveil.
4) It is said in your response that you would rather
see one unveiled Muslim woman who makes an hon¬
est living, than one who is called veiled, and who
parades herself flirtatiously in public places. We
understand from this that you attach greater impor¬
tance to the poor material conditions of Muslims than
to religious injunctions. To this day we have not had
the good fortune to see you taking any action that
would enable our poverty-stricken women to earn an
honest living without being exposed to all the temp¬
tations that threaten them in these depraved times,
even when they are veiled, let alone if we were to
throw her into the streets unveiled and lacking a
proper upbringing.
If, by good fortune and by virtue of your duty, you
had initiated this kind of action, we are convinced that
all the Muslims of Bosnia and Herzegovina would
have followed you on this path by now and be grate¬
ful to you, and we are firmly convinced that you would
have achieved greater success in this than by allow¬
ing these purely religious issues to be discussed and
dealt with in the newspapers, and by permitting un¬
qualified people to meddle in these matters.
For no reason whatsoever, you made a statement
in the premises of the Gajret [Effort Association],
beginning with the words: “One cannot blaze a trail
without being provocative” ( Gajret newspaper, De¬
cember 16, 1927, number 24), but we do not know
whom you wish to provoke, and with whom you wish
to engage in dispute, and against whom you wish to
draw battlelines.
Taking into account the stir which your statements
have caused among the citizens, on account of which
there were calls for your action to be condemned in
open meeting, the Majlis al-Jama‘at, with the inten¬
tion of protecting your standing and forestalling pub¬
lic debate about these purely religious matters, made
representations to you through official channels,
which you have treated with irony; instead of treat¬
ing the matter as an official secret, you have given
both our letter and your response to the daily press,
LETTER AND RESPONSE 201
from which it clearly follows that you wish and
intend these purely religious issues be debated pub¬
licly, thus substantiating your statement given to
the Gajret: “One cannot blaze a trail without being
provocative.”
Unfortunately, this challenge of yours has met
with a response, since we have recently read in the
Belgrade [newspaper] Politika [Politics ] some obser¬
vations by a so-called defender of your ideas, who
does not shy away from calling a hadith [tradition
of the Prophet] from the Kutub al-sitta [ The Six
Books, that is, the six most highly respected hadith
collections] false and untrue.
When we read this, we rightly expected you to
raise your voice against this unseemly scandal, but
unfortunately that too failed to take place, since you
did not react to this outrage.
As for the issue of religious endowments, the
Majlis al-Jama‘at has to state with regret that you
have also raised these issues in a place where they
do not belong at all. Endowment issues fall within
the jurisdiction of a forum of ours, which is the only
authority qualified and competent to discuss these
issues. Making statements outside this forum could
only have as its purpose to open the way for pres¬
sure on the Waqf-Ma'arif Board to stray from the
path regulated by the endowments law.
The Majlis al-Jama‘at is of the view that respect
for endowment letters and the principles of the in¬
stitution of the endowments have preserved the au¬
tonomous endowments, because we all witness how
the central endowments foundation ended up, by
buying bank shares, and that destiny could befall
them too, through unification of the endowment
property.
As for the question of wearing hats, on this issue
the ‘ulama ’ have already taken a stand, and with refer¬
ence to yomfatwa, have expressed their view, which
went contrary to your fatwa, and which was made pub¬
lic through special pronouncements. It is also known
to the Majlis al-Jama‘at that the ‘ulama ’ of Egypt have
issued fatwas concerning the wearing of hats, in accor¬
dance with all four madhhabs. These fatwas were of¬
ficially confirmed by the Shaykh al-Islam, the Shaykh
al-Azhar and the Mufti of Egypt [leading religious of¬
ficials], and are totally opposed to your decision on the
matter and your recent statements.
Copies of the representations sent you by the
Majlis al-Jama‘at on the 20th of last month were also
sent to the members of the Majlis al-‘Ulama’; in the
response it received to these representations, the
members do not share your view either, just as they
do not approve of individual declarations in these
important matters, which justifies the Majlis al-
Jama'at’s reasons for warning you of the conclusions
of the clergy with regard to your views.
The best proof that the view of Majlis al-Jama‘at
is wholly valid on all the issues mentioned in our
representations is the statement from the Supreme
Mufti of Belgrade, the enlightened Zeki Efendi, pub¬
lished in the Belgrade Politika of December 31,1927,
in which he gave a statement quite appropriate to his
post, as befits the office he occupies, and referring
to shari'a regulations, as well as the statement given
through Mufti [Ibrahim] Maglajlic [Bosnia, 1861—
1936],
In accordance with all of the above-mentioned,
the Majlis al-Jama‘at considers it its duty to state that
your letter contains no real response to the questions
asked that could satisfy this Majlis al-Jama‘at.
Finally, the Majlis al-Jama‘at must especially note
also that its representations are an official document,
and according to our education and the mores of the
profession, greetings are not included in official com¬
munications, while you have treated this with irony
in a manner unbecoming to a person who takes him¬
self seriously, such as yourself.
Sarajevo, January 12, 1928
President H. M. Merhemic
To the Sarajevo Waqf-Ma‘arif [Board of the] Majlis
al-Jama‘at, via the regional District Waqf-Ma'arif
Board in Sarajevo
I have received your letter of January 12, and here is
my response:
My responses are in accordance with what God pre¬
scribes in the Qur’an, and although 1 am familiar with
what sharp a jurists and commentators have said, I
prefer to abide by the prescriptions of the Qur'an,
because it is eternal and for all times. This is what
the Qur'an itself prescribes for me, since it prescribes
reflection, study and research. In this regard I do not
need your authorization, and therefore it is needless
to gainsay me what God Almighty has called upon
me to do. It was particularly excessive to criticize my
former and present professors. The hierarchy of
sharp a jurists is well known to me. This hierarchy
is man-made, and was not prescribed in the Qur'an.
202 Dzemaluddin Causevic
If you refer to that hierarchy so that you can say,
“This person is better than that,” this is wrong, be¬
cause only He who sees all, hears all, and knows all
can know who is better than whom. No religious
scholar has ever spoken to me in such terms as you
have. It is well-known that all four great imams [the
founders of the four main Sunni madhhabs] always
used to say, “We do not compel anyone to accept
what we consider to be right; everyone is free to use
a source, if he can; we ask no one to follow us
blindly.” Apart from this, you know that the faith of
Islam recognizes no forum that could prohibit what
the Qur’an has made permissible. In Islam, you can¬
not call someone kufr [unbelief] unless he himself so
wishes.
You say that all Muslims to this day have adhered
to the shari ‘a ordinances concerning the veiling of
women, which does not accord with the truth. First
of all, there are places in our homeland where Mus¬
lim women go out with their faces unveiled, yet con¬
duct themselves very properly and decently. Further¬
more, our courtship customs show that we have never
followed that jurisprudential ruling. Moreover, our
girls of twenty or more have not even covered those
parts that Sura 24, Verse 31 requires be covered. The
‘ulama ’ have observed all this for centuries, but have
not claimed that it did not exist. And now, the Majlis
al-Jama‘at wishes to turn a blind eye to this, so it
claims that everything is covered. Quite apart from
this, I know of areas in Turkey where Muslim women
went out with faces unveiled even during the time
of the caliphate and the religious officials [that is,
during the Ottoman Empire]. During my studies at
the time of the late Sultan Abdtilhamid [II, reigned
1876-1909], and at the very time when the late Zihni
Efendi was publishing his works, institutes of higher
education for women were being opened in Istanbul,
attended by thousands of students, all of them ma¬
ture girls, taught by female Muslim teachers and pro¬
fessors with faces uncovered. All this was known
both to the caliph himself and the Shaykh al-Islam
as well as to muftis, judges, and military judges, and
yet, by God, not one so much as paid a glance to Zihni
Efendi’s mistake. I am familiar with a good part of
Arabia and all three parts of Egypt. There too things
are not the way you imagine them. In Egypt, Mus¬
lim women who work in fields and factories go about
with faces and hands uncovered. It is the same in
Upper Egypt, while in the Nubian desert, near Lake
Chad, live the Tuareg Muslims whose men veil their
faces and whose women go unveiled. In Egypt,
Muslim girls who study wear special garments, and
their faces are unveiled. All the women teachers in
girls’ schools are Muslims, and they go about with
their faces unveiled. The situation is similar in
Yemen, from Kawkaban to Taghz and Lahj. More¬
over, there they carry on their heads a large basket
like an umbrella, which they call “muzi/fa.” And I
have been informed by a reliable source that even in
Persia, where the veiling of women has been most
strictly enforced, there are places where Muslim
women go unveiled. The same goes for Afghanistan,
while in Russia, Muslim women too have been un¬
veiled for a long time now, and play a prominent role
in the field of science, while some are doctors, and
many are teachers and book-keepers.
I did not use citations from Jassas to interpret my
responses to you. I mentioned them to someone else
and quoted his interpretation as an example. Kindly,
therefore, take a closer look at my first letter. What I
quoted from Jassas also corresponds to the Qur’an,
because I do not invoke al-Hidaya [Guidance , by
Burhanuddin Marghinani, died circa 1197], nor many
other shari ‘a jurists who share similar views, but only
the Qur’an. I affirm, and both my former and present
professors also affirm, that the Qur’an demands pu¬
rity of heart and soul, and decent conduct, from both
men and women.
You refer to Sura 24, Verse 31, emphasizing cer¬
tain words. . .. God alone knows what you meant,
because you did not even wish to explain them. In
this passage it is said that Muslim women should
place a “khimad’ over their bosoms. It was the cus¬
tom in Arabia for women to wear a type of dress
through which one could see the bosom, and this was
not appropriate for modesty, so there came the order
to cover those parts. All of this verse, from “And put”
to the end, refers to those secret adornments that can¬
not be displayed to anyone without necessity, other
than to one’s husband and close relatives. There is
not a word in it about covering the face. “ Khimar ” is
similar to our shawl, which the women in Yemen,
who wear a basket on their heads, put over their
shoulders and fasten at the neck and bosom. In San‘a’
they draw the khimar over their heads and tie it at
the neck so that the two ends cover the bosom, as
understood from the words “over their bosoms.”
You refer to some first command concerning veil¬
ing, and you have concluded from this verse that
everything must be veiled, even the face. This inter-
LETTER AND RESPONSE 203
pretation is entirely false, since the verse is very clear.
The verse says that Muslim women should cast down
their eyes, guard their private parts for this is purer
for them, and not reveal their adornments, save such
as are outward; these are the hands and the face, be¬
cause these are a woman’s outward adornment. In
Sura 24, Verse 30, Muslim men, too, are required to
cast down their eyes and guard their private parts,
from which it clearly follows that the main thing—
both for men and women—is a good upbringing and
moral conduct, without which even veiling serves no
purpose.
You also refer to Sura 33, Verse 59, and empha¬
size certain words, saying that something should be
covered in addition to what was prescribed earlier.
This is not at all what is to be understood here. It says
that [women] should put on a jilbab [outer garment]
and draw it close to themselves, and that women
should not go about bare-chested. What is demanded
here is modest dress, and there is not a word about
veiling the face, except that some commentators in¬
terpret it to mean that the jilbab should be held in the
hands in such a way so that only one eye can see, and
this interpretation is taken as a difficult way [of per¬
forming a religious duty].
You refer to Sura 33, Verse 33, again consider¬
ing certain words only, and so you conclude what
absolutely cannot be understood from the verse. This
verse is a special injunction concerning the noble
wives of our Prophet. The verse calls upon the wives
of the Prophet not to leave their houses without ne¬
cessity, and not to behave in the street in the manner
of women in the age of ignorance .. . and to remem¬
ber what is recited in their homes, so as to learn the
great signs of God and the Wisdom.... There is not
a word in that verse about veiling women’s faces. I
said in my first letter (bearing in mind these injunc¬
tions): whoever is able to do so, let him conform to
the injunctions concerning the most noble wives of
our Prophet, and let him spread learning at home and
teach his womenfolk skills, but I assure you that there
are very few able to do so these days.
You also refer to Sura 24, Verse 60, and again
deduce something that is not in the verse. The verse
says that women who are past child-bearing and have
no hope of marriage may—without committing a
sin—put off their clothes, that is, the jilbab and
khimar, but that it is better for them to guard their
chastity and not to flaunt their adornments. Again,
there is nothing here about veiling the face.
You hold it against me that I take no account of
these depraved times, from which it follows that you
did not understand me. For twenty-four years you
have not understood me, so it seems that you will
never understand me. I have always stood for what I
affirm and answer for. During the war [World
War I], when a workshop for sewing and mending
military uniforms was set up, I recommended to
many Muslim women that they work there to earn
a living. Every time I went to the camp where the
workshop was housed, I would always say to the
Muslim women: “Behave nicely and decently, do
not tarnish the name of Islam, and it is better for you
to earn a living honorably than to be a burden on
someone else.” On that occasion, when they asked
me, I said that they could have their faces and hands
uncovered. When a delegation came to me asking
to take these Muslim ladies away from the work¬
shop, I explained everything to them, saying, “Each
one who joins the workshop earns six crowns a day,
and there are some who make as much as 12 crowns,
or even 18. If you can secure a hundred crowns
a month for every one of them (and there are now
140 of them) until the end of the war, I shall take
them away immediately, but their places will be
filled by others who can barely wait to be taken on.”
At this remark of mine the gentlemen asked for the
workshop to be moved to the Kolobara and for
a Muslim to supervise it, to which I replied that
this was impossible for technical reasons. They left,
and the women continued to work until the end of
war.
Six years ago, when speaking in the Begova
Mosque of the verse “a mother should not be made
to suffer on account of her child,” [Sura 2, Verse 233]
I gave it a rather broad interpretation. I well remem¬
ber what I said on that occasion: A mother must not
harm her child in bringing it up, nor must a father in
supporting it, but the ignorance of parents is the
greatest harm to children. Then, adhering to the in¬
terpretation of my former and present teachers, I
elaborated how, according to shari'a rules, it is the
major duty of every girl to learn the prescriptions on
bringing up children and to know the basic rules for
protecting a child’s health, and how this is something
every girl must learn before marriage. I said that it is
a duty of all Muslims to disseminate knowledge, both
men and women. I explained the difficulties associ¬
ated with [male doctors performing] the medical
examinations needed by Muslim women, and so I
204 Dzemaluddin Causevic
emphasized the need to train Muslim women as doc¬
tors, and said that this was an individual duty [incum¬
bent upon each Muslim]. I said at that time that
Muslim women can pursue their studies with their
faces unveiled.
I have criticized some members of the Gajret [As¬
sociation], even in the Gajret premises. I said that
they were a Muslim association, and that as such they
were duty-bound to take care of the religious up¬
bringing of the Muslim children entrusted to them,
since they [through their association] have taken
upon themselves a parental duty. I reproached them
for not maintaining religious teachers in their board¬
ing schools, so that the children could become more
knowledgeable about religious prescriptions and the
proper recitation of certain Qur’anic verses. I criti¬
cized them because they took Muslim girls who were
unfamiliar with religious prescriptions to an exhibi¬
tion in Novi Sad and beyond, and during Ramadan
at that, and I said that this was inappropriate. Fur¬
thermore, I also criticized those who wore hats, both
within the Gajret and outside it, and I said to them
that it was not proper of them to fail in performing
their religious duty, not to come to the mosque for
prayer and listen to my lecture, not to come into con¬
tact with Muslims and help them with their knowl¬
edge. I called upon them to hold lectures, each on his
profession, and gave the example of the intelligen¬
tsia of our fellow citizens of other religions; I stressed
that they too should contribute wholeheartedly to the
welfare of the Islamic community.
Therefore, your reproach that I have not done my
duty is out of place. I have performed my duty as has
no other Reis before me. For almost eight years I have
been interpreting religious truths in the Begova
Mosque, and I elaborate and recommend what is
beneficial for the Islamic community. Having pointed
a finger at the shortcomings of our religious up¬
bringing, I have also recommended some remedies.
I well remember saying on many occasions, while in¬
terpreting God’s commands on mutual help, that all
Majlis al-Jama‘ats and regional boards should have
a list of all the Muslims in their area. They should
have a list from which it could be seen who has a
guardian and tutor and who has not, how many chil¬
dren go to school and how many do not, who has a
job and what kind, as the basis for determining what
is best for every sector of the Islamic community. I
said then that it is not right to expect of the Reis that
he take care of every matter himself. I emphasized
that we should all be together, and I would be there
too. Despite legal regulations which tie my hands, I
have also done more in the field of education than
any other Reis. I do not want to lay too much em¬
phasis on all that I have done for the Islamic com¬
munity, but I must tell you that I am very sorry that
the very Majlis al-Jama ‘at which should best appre¬
ciate my work should reproach me for not perform¬
ing my duty. If all the Majlis al-Jama'ats were to say
the same, then I would have to affirm that the Mus¬
lim community in Bosnia and Herzegovina is un¬
grateful and does not know how to appreciate its
people.
The words “one cannot move ahead without
being provocative” were not used in the sense you
attribute to them. While I was speaking on the Gajret
premises about ways of making use of endowment
buildings and property, particularly graveyards,
someone shouted, “That would provoke the people,”
to which I replied, “One cannot move forward with¬
out being provocative,” and I mentioned the example
of building shops in front of the Ferhadija Mosque.
I said that there had been complaints while the shops
were being built outside the Ferhadija, and that a
friend of mine had come to me angry that the mortal
remains of his aunt had been exhumed and buried
outside the Ferhadija mihrab [prayer niche facing
Mecca]. There is no irony in my letter whatsoever. I
am completely sincere and I sincerely express my
thoughts, and therefore it was needless to ascribe to
me any kind of irony. I am very far from that.
I hardly read our newspapers here, and even the
Belgrade press; moreover, I had no time to read this
letter of yours until three days ago. I do not know,
therefore, who said what. Furthermore, until recently
I did not even know that my responses had been char¬
acterized as a kind of statement, and you have prob¬
ably also accepted that. Anyway, many things have
been said about the Qur’an too, yet a gem remains a
gem, and the hot sun keeps on shining. When you
read that attack, you could have responded, since
every Muslim is bound to speak and defend the truth.
There is not a word in my letters and responses
about coercion, and in this regard you are completely
wrong. I respect everyone’s opinion, even if it does
not agree with mine. Anyone who knows me well can
confirm that. At the same time, I have quite a differ¬
ent understanding of the endowments and endow¬
ment letters from yours. In any case, those who come
after us will be able to see who was right.
LETTER AND RESPONSE 205
I do not know what makes you bring up the issue
of wearing hats now. I gave a response regarding hats
as long ago as early 1914. And what I said is true. I
know what the ‘ulama ’ have said, but I also know
that this does not correspond to the true source of
Islam. As a matter of fact, the ‘ulama' of Egypt have
said nothing new. They have said [quotation in Ara¬
bic], “In wearing a hat for the sake of kufr, kufr there
will be.. ..” If someone intends kufr in putting on a
hat, it will constitute kufr. And I say too, if someone
means to become a kafir [unbeliever] by wearing a
particular type of dress, he will become a kafir. Thus
intention and will are crucial. If someone does not
desire kufr, nothing can drive him into kufr.
I know that you have addressed a letter to my
friends, because they told me so. I respect everyone’s
opinion, just as I respect the opinion of my friends
and of Hajji Mufti Maglajlic, and even that of the
supreme mufti, although I may not know what they
said, but I value my own opinion the most, because
that is how I was brought up. I impose nothing upon
anybody, not even among my own circle. The Majlis
al-Jama‘at may take my response any way it wishes.
A time will come after us when what Dzemaluddin
said and intended will be better understood.
The main Islamic centers of Afghanistan, Iran,
and Egypt and their decision-making factors have
already taken account of the serious upbringing of
their womenfolk. The Muslims of these countries
have been saying for a long time now that we must
shake off our lethargy and disseminate knowledge in
all sectors of the Islamic community, as the Qur’an
demands, and they demonstrate this by their actions
in Afghanistan and Iran, where special professional
schools for womenfolk have been opened in which
women study various sciences and are introduced to
various skills and crafts. In addition, workshops have
been opened for the employment of needy and able
women. Egypt takes pride in these establishments,
and in the hundreds of its educated ladies, who make
a great contribution to their homeland in various
fields. These Muslims feel the need for Muslim
women to be educated in all the professions required
by the Islamic community. They say that we must
have Muslim women doctors, women teachers,
women able to work in the sanitation departments,
and women versed in various arts and crafts, as did
our forefathers in previous centuries. We cannot, they
say, get the better of Europe if we do not make the
other half of our strength equal to the struggle and
jihad [religious struggle],.. . These decision mak¬
ers, who represent millions of Muslims, know the
Qur’anic injunctions and the life of the pious early
Muslims better than all of us.
Necessity is a very powerful motive force. Neces¬
sity compels one to relinquish difficult ways of per¬
forming religious duties and to move to easier ways.
It was on this basis that the shari ‘a jurists set out their
arguments. Time achieves wonders. Time changed
the feredza [full black mantle, worn with face-cov¬
ering] into the peca [a gauzy veil over the face] with
vala and zar [light outer wraps]. Time is changing
both the zar and the vala into the jilbab known as
mantija [mantle] and the semi -vala. There is a firm
desire to draw a line of upbringing and pure educa¬
tion, so as not to go too far, so as to preserve what is
most important—purity of heart and soul, while also
meeting one’s needs.
At the beginning of your letter, you pronounce me
guilty of giving responses, from which I can see that
you have not read my letter carefully, or perhaps you
doubt my exposition. Am I guilty if someone is de¬
sirous of confusing terminology? Three days ago a
meeting on municipal elections was held in the read¬
ing room; after discussions on the subject, a friend
of mine, for whom I had done all I could and even
what I should not have, stood up and said, no more
no less, “Forget the elections and all that. Do you
know that our religion is in danger? The Reis wants
to put hats on our heads and to unveil our women.”
And he went on to say, agitatedly, “Let him wear a
hat and unveil his own wife.” Nobody among the
Muslims present wanted to put him right or tell him
that the religion is in danger from another quarter,
which the Reis fears too—from ignorance. Not even
the person who later read the letter from the Majlis
al-Jama‘at without my answer did so. If this was not
incitement to rebellion, I don’t know what is. I do
not know of any reason for discussing this at meet¬
ings devoted to municipal elections. I have two un¬
signed letters sent from here to some districts, in
which Muslims are called to rise up against Reis
Cause vid’s heresy. These letters were brought to my
attention and for my use by Muslims, and time is
already revealing both their authors and those who
sent them. I am not the one, therefore, who is open¬
ing up a line of attack, but my best friends who are
doing so against me.
I have not told anyone to wear a hat, I have not
told anyone to unveil his wife. I merely interpret the
206 Dzemaluddin Causevic
truth and the easy paths of religious duty, and the
needs that time has brought and continues to bring
upon us. The Majlis al-Jama‘at may take my answer
however it wishes. There is nothing to prevent it, and
I am only glad that the Majlis al-Jama‘at will uphold
the rules of the shari ‘a and has no intention of giv¬
ing them up. You would have received this response
more quickly and clearly had you come to me, and
you would have received an answer concerning the
Mufti of Sarajevo’s fatwa, but—well—you do not
accept even my greeting, proving thereby that your
letters are official, and so I withdraw my previous
“Salaam aleykum” [Peace be upon you]!
Sarajevo, January 27, 1928
Dzemaluddin
27
‘Abd al-Qadir al-Maghribi
Muhammad and Woman
‘Abd al-Qadir al-Maghribi (Lebanon, 1867-1956) contributed to the development of
modernist journalism in Egypt, Lebanon, and Syria during the late Ottoman and early
French Mandate periods, The son of a religious law court official, he studied at a school
established in Tripoli, Syria, by Shaykh Husayn al-Jisr (Lebanon, 1845-1909), a cautious
advocate of reconciling natural sciences with Islamic theology. Inspired by the work of
Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (chapter I I), Maghribi left Ottoman Syria for Egypt in 1905,
where he began his journalistic career. He returned to Lebanon afterthe Ottoman Young
Turk of 1908 and published a modernist periodical, al-Burhan (The Proof). In 1914, he
went to Medina to participate in the establishment of an Islamic college, but the out¬
break of World War I abruptly ended that effort. While many other Arab modernists
supported Arab separation from the Ottoman Empire, Maghribi remained loyal to Istanbul,
He spent the war years teaching at an Islamic college in Jerusalem and writing for a pro-
Ottoman newspaper in Damascus, Later, Maghribi worked on behalf of Arabic language
nefonm at academies in Syria, Egypt, and Iraq. He is best known for emphasizing moral
nefonm as the key to resolving social and economic problems. In this selection, Maghribi
cites evidence from the Prophet’s relationship with his wet nurse and two of his wives to
argue that Islam allows women to maintain active roles in society. In addition, he elabo¬
rates a common modernist position on the standing of women in Islamic law regarding
divorce, polygamy, inheritance, and legal testimony. 1
There are many possible topics for speeches, and
many speech parties. These parties are made success¬
ful by their hosts, but they should also be made so
by the proper choice of topic and by their pleasant
atmosphere. Where, my sirs, can I find a topic [for
my speech] as superior as this party? Truly, to take
into consideration the suitability of the topic to the
party is the most difficult task.
One day, I explained the word “women” in the
presence of an educated girl. I said that it means
“shunning,” “expulsion,” and “delay,” and from the
word comes “al-minsa ’h” which is a stick—because
the shepherd expels his sheep with it. The girl got
angry and said: “Then the Arabs called women
‘women’ because they are excluded, shunned and
‘Abd al-Qadir al-Maghribi, Muhammad wa at- mar’a (Muham¬
mad and Woman ) (Damascus, Syria: no publisher indicated.
1928). The essay was first presented as a speech to the Syr¬
ian Association for the Education of Youth in Beirut, on Janu¬
ary 11, 1928. Translation from Arabic by Hager El Hadidi.
Introduction by David D. Commins.
1. Muhammad Farid ‘Abd Allah, ‘Abd al-Qadir al-
Maghribi wa-ara ’uhu ft al-lugha wa-al-nahw (‘Abd al-Qadir
expelled?!!” I wondered about her conclusion, and I
prayed to God to guard me against her stubbornness,
and I answered her objection with what I believed
would please her on the whole.
And then, after I was invited to speak at this party,
one day I saw the same girl reading a book with great
interest. So I asked her: “What is this book?” She
said: “al-Zubaydi.”
[Ahmad ibn Ahmad] al-Zubaydi [circa 1409-
1488], sirs, is [author of] a religious book summa¬
rizing all the hadiths [narratives of the Prophet] col¬
lected by [Muhammad ibn Isma‘il] al-Bukhari [the
foremost compiler of hadith, 810-870],
So I encouraged her to read it, and I praised her
choice of that book to read, instead of those books
that girls are usually fond of. The girl finished read-
al-Maghribi and His Views on Language and Grammar)
(Beirut. Lebanon: Dar al-Mawasim, 1997); Sami al-Dahhan.
al-Qudama’ wa-mu'asirun (People of the Past and Present )
(Egypt: Dar al-Ma‘arif, 1961); Muhammad As'ad Talas,
Muhadarat ‘an ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Maghribi (Lectures on ‘Abd
al-Qadir al-Maghribi ) (Cairo, Egypt: League of Arab States.
1958).
207
208
‘Abd al-Qadir al-Maghribi
ing al-Zubaydi. As she was about to lay it down, she
turned to those around her and said: “I did not find
in all the hadiths that I read in this book anything that
would make you feel that the Prophet, peace be upon
him, had any disdain towards woman. On the con¬
trary, I saw him honor her and put her on equal foot¬
ing with men in [religious] commandments and du¬
ties. So where did the accusation that our shari'a
[Islamic law] degrades woman or teaches any low¬
ering of her standing come from?!!”
I do not hide from you, sirs, that my happiness
about her deduction this time made me forget my dis¬
appointment with her conclusion the first time. I
became even happier when I realized that I had found
the topic for my speech for this party. And I called
out: “I found it. I found it!” Just like Archimedes: “I
found it. I found it.”
Yes, I found the topic, sirs, but I didn’t find the
time needed to give it its due, because the Education
Association—I thank it anyway—did not give me
time for a speech at a party. It gave me time only for
a phone call. So forgive me if I hasten or if I gloss
over certain aspects.
The Arabs, due to the nature of their countries and
the constitution of their temperaments, saw in woman
their delight and their comfort, so they loved her and
almost worshiped her. And due to the nature of their
social relations and their customary system of raid
and capture, they saw woman as both a cause of their
pleasure and their affliction with shame. So they
perceived her as an evil omen; so much so that fe¬
male babies were sometimes buried alive. So the
Arabs were caught between two forces: pulled by the
nature of their region and their temperament, which
attracted them to woman, and pulled the other way
by their social system and their wars, which distanced
them from her.
Muhammad, peace be upon him, was bom in the
Arabian peninsula, the people of which, as we have
described, were given to these two tendencies. He
confirmed the first instance, affection toward woman,
and blessed it by announcing: “Another of His signs
is that He created mates of your own kin of your¬
selves, so that you may get peace of mind from them,
and has put love and compassion between you.”
[Qur’an, Sura 30, Verse 21]
And he denounced the second case, the case of
disfavor toward woman. He elevated her standing,
returned her to the throne of her domain, and called
out, saying: “The woman is the mistress of her
abode.” “The woman is the guardian of her husband’s
abode and she is responsible for her flock.” The pur¬
pose of Muhammad’s prophecy is not only to pro¬
claim the oneness of God, but also to preach on be¬
half of woman and to celebrate her return to the
throne of her domain.
‘Umar ibn al-Khattab [the second caliph, 634-
644] said: “By God, in pre-Islamic ignorance we did
not consider women, until God revealed about them
what He revealed and foreordained what He foreor¬
dained for them.”
And for those who follow the stages of the life of
the Prophet, peace be upon him, they realize the
causes that made his noble spirit receptive to this
female revelation.
His father died, and then his mother, when he was
only a few years of age. So his nursing was taken over
by an Abyssinian girl named Baraka, nicknamed
“Umm Ayman.” And this girl worked to raise him
and serve him until he turned twenty-five. So he was
happy with what he saw from his nurse in terms of
affection and care. And he felt the first of women’s
functions in this existence: woman as woman, even
if she was an Abyssinian and a slave, and did not
belong to the blood line of the Arabs, nor was of
noble descent.
And then the Divine Providence willed to move
Muhammad to live close by the most eminent woman
among the Quraysh [the dominant tribe of Mecca].
So he married the lady Khadija bint Khuwaylid [554-
619]. Something new in the life of Muhammad: he
moved on to another phase of knowing woman, and
of examining her roles. And he was no longer the
youth who was served by his humble nurse. So he
honored her; but the youth who is loved by a noble
woman also loves her in return. He was a youth of
twenty-five, and she was a middle-aged woman in
her forties. As if the Divine Providence saw that in
his youth he still needed the affection of a woman
who had age, experience, and wealth, so was his
marriage to Khadija facilitated.
Her first husband had died, so many eminent
Quraysh men asked for her hand in marriage. But she
had refused them all, preferring to keep her indepen¬
dence and to tend to the business of her trade. She
was looking for a trustworthy man, to make him her
business agent. So she found Muhammad. She not
only found him honest with her money, but also with
her heart, so she entrusted him with all.
MUHAMMAD AND WOMAN 209
All those who saw Muhammad, peace be upon
him, and heard his speech felt that he would play a
role in the renaissance of the Arabs, and their salva¬
tion from ignorance. And this was not hidden from
Khadija; she believed that her fianc6 was going to
be a great man, and an educator of nations and gen¬
erations, so her fondness for him increased, and so
too her desire for his affection.
Anas [ibn Malik, servant of the Prophet, circa
612-709] said: “The Prophet, peace be upon him,
was with his uncle, Abu Talib, so he took his per¬
mission to go to his fiancee Khadija, so he gave him
permission. And he [Abu Talib] sent a slave-girl
called Naba'a to follow him [the Prophet], telling her,
‘See what Khadija says to my nephew Muhammad,’
“Naba‘a said, ‘I saw something strange. The mo¬
ment Khadija heard him, she went out the door and
took his hand and held it to her chest and neck. Then
she said to him, “I swear by my father and mother, I
cannot do this thing (that you have barred me from
doing). But I hope that you are the Prophet that will
be revealed. If it is you, then recognize my rights and
my standing and pray to the God that reveals you that
he would reveal you to me.” Muhammad answered
her: “By God, if I am he, I will never forget what you
have done for me. And if it is somebody else, the God
you have served will never neglect you.’””
Muhammad didn’t have money or property, and he
lacked the means for comfortable living, but this
became available when he married Khadija. So what
does he do? Does he use the money and the prosper¬
ity of his wife for play, repose, and delight?
No. The youthful Muhammad used his wife’s
money to free his heart from worries about the fam¬
ily, as he used her affection and her obedience to
dedicate his time to worshiping his Creator, and to
performing the great work that preoccupied him.
Here is Muhammad secluding himself from people
and taking refuge in a cave in Mount Hira,’ talking to
his God and asking Him to guide His people. Here is
Khadija his wife, encouraging him and giving him
confidence, patience, and certainty in himself. Here
she is preparing food for him to eat during his long
seclusion. Here is Muhammad’s Magdalene in vigil
at the foot of the mountain where her husband has iso¬
lated himself, and her heart is filled up with anticipa¬
tion, faith, and confidence in the future.
In this way we see how the prophecy was bom in
the hand of a woman, Khadija, whereas its birth was
not witnessed by any of the men. Neither Abu Bakr
nor ‘Umar [two of the Prophet’s closest male follow¬
ers] heard it, nor did ‘Ali [the Prophet’s son-in-law]
or Mu'awiyya [caliph, 661-680],
Then Khadija died. Abu Bakr, the oldest of the
companions of Muhammad, peace be upon him,
wished to have the honor of his kinship, so he mar¬
ried his daughter ‘A’isha [circa 614-678] to him.
‘A’isha was not only [the Prophet’s] wife, but also
his student. And that is the third of Muhammad’s
stages with woman: Baraka the Abyssinian cares for
him in his childhood, and the elder Khadija embraces
him and encourages him in his youth, and ‘A’isha the
faithful makes him happy and becomes his disciple
in his old age.
Muhammad experienced woman in all of his fife’s
stages, and he exchanged affection with her as a
child, as a youth, and as an elder. And she had enough
influence in his life to make him elevate her stand¬
ing, and declare her freedom, and put her on an equal
footing with men.
And one of the strangest coincidences is that the
Makun council convened during the time of Muham¬
mad, in the year 586, and discussed Is woman a hu¬
man being? [The council] stated that she is a human
being but was created to serve man. 2 As soon as this
verdict was reached in Europe, Muhammad contra¬
dicted it in the Hijaz and raised his voice saying:
“Women are sisters to men.”
But he said to men: Are you not eager to enter
paradise? This paradise that you are so desirous of
is “under the feet of mothers,” and every woman is
a mother, if not in fact then in her female power.
Nobody has said so much to honor woman as this
saying given by Muhammad. If people thought of
woman as the devil, Muhammad saw her as a pro¬
tective charm against the devil.
He asked one youth among his companions, who
was called Mu'adh ibn Jabal [died 627]:
“O Mu'adh, do you have a wife?”
“No.”
“You are then a brother to the devils.”
In other words, you should have protected your¬
self from the devils by marrying a woman. And
2. [This reference is unclear. No major Christian coun¬
cil was held in 586, though the Council in Trullo of 692, a
century later, did decree that women should be silent in
church, as they are “to be in subjection, as the law also saith"
(Canon 70. quoting the Bible, 1 Corinthians, chapter 14,
verse 34).—Ed.]
210 ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Maghribi
Muhammad, peace be upon him, wanted, by honor¬
ing woman and elevating her standing in the eyes of
men in this way, to make them understand that their
new renaissance is built on the shoulders of both
sexes together—men and women—just like the great
universal renaissances. And when the Arab women
saw this renaissance that Muhammad raised them
into, they were extremely happy with it, and were
active to enrich themselves with it, to such an extent
that when they saw themselves cheated in some of
their rights they gathered in a meeting and decided
to tell the Prophet about their demands through a
representative among them, one of the companions
of the Prophet, Asma’ bint Yazid [died 693],
Asma’ came to the Prophet and said to him: “I am
a messenger; behind me is a group of women, and all
of them say what I say and are of the same opinion.”
So she presented to the Prophet the demands of
the women who sent her. The Prophet satisfied their
demands, and declared his happiness with her dis¬
course and her courage, and turned to the compan¬
ions around him and said: “Have you heard a
woman’s speech better than this woman asking about
her religion?”
This statement is enough [to show] that he encour¬
aged woman and emphasized the importance of her
standing. The Prophet, peace be upon him, did not
like to be autocratic in matters related to woman’s
marriage; he gave her the right to marry whomever
she chooses and prefers to live with, on condition that
this marriage does not degrade the honor of her clan.
One woman, Barira, was a slave of noble ‘A'isha,
so she freed her. Barira was married to a man called
Mughith. So when she had her freedom she had the
right to choose to remain married to Mughith or not.
And it appears that Barira was not comfortable liv¬
ing with Mughith. So she declared that she did not
want him as her husband. This was difficult for
Mughith to handle, as he loved her a great deal. So
he tried to win her favor, but she refused. Here is
Barira walking in the roads of Medina, and poor
Mughith walks behind her. Tears fall on his cheeks,
and people look at him, and have pity on him. Yet
Barira does not have compassion and does not have
mercy.
“O Barira, have mercy on him. Have sympathy for
his situation. Have pity for him.”
“No! I don’t want him.”
They told the Prophet about Barira and Mughith.
So he called her to him, and talked to her about him,
so she said to him: “Are you giving me an order, O
Messenger of God?”
[The Prophet said:] “No, but 1 am mediating for
him.”
“No, I do not want him.”
So the Prophet did not contradict her and did not
blame her for using her freedom thusly, despite the
fact that she was the freed slave of his wife; rather
he turned to his uncle ‘Abbas [ibn ‘Abd al-Muttalib,
died 652] and said to him: “O ‘Abbas, don’t you
wonder about Mughith’s love for Barira, and about
Barira’s hatred towards Mughith?”
And just as the Prophet, peace be upon him, ac¬
knowledged a woman’s right to independence in her
private affairs, he considered it her right also to par¬
ticipate along with men in public service. The most
important of these public services in this era was
giving support to the expansion of Islam, and resist¬
ing those who opposed it. Women made great con¬
tributions in this domain. And a group of the
Prophet’s companions’ women used to accompany
the army and serve the warriors.
Umm ‘Atiyya said: “I used to make food for the
warriors, and keep their tents, and tend their wounds,
and take care of their sick.”
And Umm Sinan said that when the Prophet
wanted to go to Khaybar, she came to him and told
him: “Shall I accompany you in this voyage? I can
supply the water bag, and heal the sick and the
wounded and take care of the men.”
[The Prophet responded:] “Come along with
God’s blessing. You have friends who asked to ac¬
company me, and I gave them permission. Be with
my wife Umm Salama [died 679].” As for Umm
Kabsha, when she asked his permission to accom¬
pany him, he told her no. So she told him: “I medi¬
cate the sick and take care of the wounded.”
“Sit down, I don’t want people to say that
Muhammad’s invasion is accompanied by a woman.”
So you see, sirs, how the Prophet explained not
taking her with him by his concern that it would
spread among the tribes that Muhammad had no men
nor heroes, for he fights with those who have anklets.
He did not tell her, “Sit down, accompanying war¬
riors is not your business.”
And Anas said: “In the battle of U’hud [in 625], I
saw ‘A’isha, the wife of the Prophet, and with her
my mother Umm Salim, [their garments] rolled up. I
could see their anklets as they jumped with water
bags on their backs, emptying them in the mouths of
MUHAMMAD AND WOMAN 2M
the thirsty and then coming back to fill up and return¬
ing to empty them in their mouths again.”
Here is another woman, Rafida the Muslim. She
did not accompany the army but had pitched her tent
in the mosque of the Prophet and would heal the
wounded and medicate the sick. And when the leader
of the companions of the Prophet, Sa‘d ibn Mu‘adh,
was wounded in the Battle of the Ditch [in 627], the
Prophet, peace be upon him, told them: "Take him to
Rafida’s tent.” This was Rafida’s role in time of war.
As for the time of peace, she used to bring the handi¬
capped and the unfortunate to her tent to take care of
them and alleviate their suffering. The tent, Rafida’s
tent, was a blessing: It was a military hospital during
war and a shelter for the handicapped during peace.
A heathen warrior came to Umm Hani’ [bint Abi
Talib] and asked her for protection, so she gave it to
him. When some of the Prophet’s companions ob¬
jected and wanted to nullify it, she got angry and
complained to the Prophet, who told her: “We give
protection to whomever you have given protection,
O Umm Hani’.” This act was an interference in mili¬
tary and political affairs, and the Prophet acknowl¬
edged that she had the right to do what she did. He
did not tell her: “This is not your business, [restrict
yourself rather to] taking care of cooking, adorning
your self, and raising children.”
But in spite of that, my ladies, Muhammad saw
that adornment and household management were the
most elevated of women’s functions. As he was
proud of the Quraysh woman who protects her
husband’s money and takes care of raising her chil¬
dren—at the same time, he liked the woman who did
not forget her femininity and did not ignore her
adornment, and did not hinder her maternity in one
way or another, to the extent that he hated to see no
trace of dye in a woman’s palms (dye was the most
beautiful adornment in past eras).
Umm Sinan said: “I pledged Islam to the Prophet,
so he looked at my hands with no traces of dye, and
said, ‘None of you should change her nails; but tie
her hand even with a belt.’” So he encouraged them
to use dye and to wear a bracelet, even one made of
leather, on her wrist.
Muhammad, peace be upon him, knew that woman’s
psychology 3 and instincts related to her sex, so he
3. [Maghribi uses the word nafisa , derived from nafs
(psyche), as a neologism for “psychology.”—Trans.]
treated her according to what he learned about her:
he was always accommodating and kind and talked
to her tenderly.
Many of the ways he used to treat his wives we
see today as inappropriate and unsuitable: among
these are taking them on his travels. And if one of
them wanted to ride, he gave her his knee to step on
and mount her saddle. Whenever he was in the desert
with her, he would race her great distances for sport
and to entertain her. On a feast day in Abyssinia, he
let her enter the mosque to watch their games with
spears, similar to today’s games with sword and
shield.
The Prophet, peace be upon him, used to have a
neighbor from Persia. This Persian invited him for
food, but did not invite his wife, the noble ‘A’isha.
The Prophet did not accept the invitation without
‘A’isha, so he invited her. It is as if the Prophet saw
that failing to invite her was a humiliation to her, and
that is why he refused the invitation if she was not
invited also.
He prohibited a man from beating his wife and
noted that beating her was not appropriate for the
marital relationship between them: he beat her at
midday and then praised her at night, and insisted on
winning her favor. A man cannot do both!
English laws still, today, allow the husband to beat
his wife, albeit with a stick that is not thicker than a
finger.
And the Prophet, peace be upon him, used to
honor his nurse, Baraka the Abyssinian, and used to
say to the companions: This is my mother, after my
mother. He used to joke with her sometimes. She
asked him for a camel to ride. So he promised to give
her the offspring of his she-camel. She shouted, “And
what should I do with the offspring of a she-camel,
will it be able to carry me? I want a camel." The com¬
panion laughed and said to her, “O Baraka, woe unto
you, and aren’t all camels just the offspring of a she-
camel?” And one morning the Prophet saw [some]
women coming back from a wedding accompanied
by their sons. So he stood up and called out, saying:
“O God, you are among the most beloved people to
me. O God, you are among the most beloved people
to me.”
Yes, sirs, he loved women because they raise men
just as Baraka raised him in his orphanhood. They
help men in their great renaissances, as Khadija
helped him in his renaissance. And they spread cul¬
ture and science as ‘A'isha did by spreading his cul-
212 ‘ Abd al-Qadir al-Maghribi
ture and delivering to his umma the rules of his
shari ‘a.
Muhammad’s preaching on woman and his liberation
of her from her old slavery is not hidden from Euro¬
pean scholars, even those who are unfair. The
Orientalist Andre Servier [France, flourished 1890s-
1920s] said the following in a book he called L 'Islam
et la psychologie du musulman [Islam and the Psy¬
chology of the Muslim, 1923]:
Muhammad creates the conditions that make the
woman join his camp and does not speak about her
except with all kindness, and strives to improve her
situation. The women and children before him did
not inherit. Previously, the closest [male] kin to the
deceased inherited the dead man’s women, along
with what he inherited as a whole in money and
slaves. With Muhammad’s renaissance, he gave
woman the right to inherit. And made it a duty to be
positive towards her.
Then Servier said:
Those who want to confirm Muhammad’s extreme
care for woman should read his speech in Mecca, in
which he admonished his audience to take care of
women. Muhammad is not ignorant of the fact that
if the woman is a captive during the day, she is
mistress in the night, and her power is ever great.
This is what Andre Servier said, and despite his at¬
tack on Muhammad he could not help but state that
Muhammad liberated woman.
The German scholar Driesman [possibly Hein¬
rich Driesmans, German racial ideologist, 1863-
1927] declared that Muhammad’s giving the woman
her freedom is the sole reason for the renaissance
of the Arabs and the rise of their civilization. And
for that reason, when his followers took away this
freedom, they degenerated and their civilizations
declined.
The statement of Andre Servier that “Muhammad is
not ignorant of the fact that the woman is a captive
during the day” mocks and casts aspersion on Islam,
and we have the right to criticize him for it: We do
not know the reasons that made Andre Servier and
his colleagues claim that the Muslim woman is a
captive or like a captive.
What are the issues they refer to, I wonder: the
veil, divorce, polygamy, classification of inheritance,
and qualification for [legal] testimony? We cannot
speak of these five issues at length because of the
limited amount of time on one hand, and because
these issues have received lengthy arguments among
Muslims and others, so that talking about them has
become boring. In spite of this, I will say a few tele¬
phonic words about them:
The first of these issues is the veil. My word about it
is that human beings, since the day they reached this
social stage, have aristocratic classes that consider
it in their interest to distinguish themselves, to veil
themselves or reduce interaction with other classes,
and it is the same with kings and queens and also high
people and their women even today.
The prophecy of Muhammad, peace be upon him,
has nothing to do with what is aristocratic. He did
not institute a veil between himself and the mass of
people. They used to enter his house to receive
knowledge as students enter their teachers’ schools.
But some of these students overstayed their welcome.
‘Umar advised him to prevent people from coming
to his house, but the Prophet did not agree with him,
preferring to exercise what we call today “democ¬
racy,” and to avoid royal behavior. Then the situa¬
tion got worse, so a revelation was revealed that [the
Prophet’s wives] should be veiled, and people should
be prevented from coming to [the Prophet’s] house
except under special circumstances. This is the only
aristocratic element that Muhammad was forced by
extreme necessity to adopt.
Then the Muslims began to imitate their Prophet,
following the precept: “The people follow the reli¬
gion of their kings.” So they veiled their women until
every Muslim woman became a veiled queen and
every Muslim house a royal court. But how bad is
the future of a nation with no working women, and
only veiled queens! The Islamic veil, ladies and
gentlemen, is a remnant of the traces of aristocracy
of woman and her royalty in Islam, and not a rem¬
nant of her humiliation and her slavery.
My word on the veil is complete. I now move on
to my second word, about the inheritance of a daugh¬
ter being half that of her brother.
This is the Islamic shari'a rule that everybody in
England seems to know about, by which inheritance
does not pass to daughters, and their father’s wealth
is given only to the eldest of the sons. That is because
the eldest son is the head of the family, bearer of its
title, and keeper of the tradition of its glory. This is
very similar to the common Islamic view of male
MUHAMMAD AND WOMAN
213
offspring in the family. Since the sons are following
their fathers in his family, they need more money than
their sisters, who get incorporated into other fami¬
lies, where they are not financially responsible. So
then the issue is not one of preferring men to women,
but rather a social and economic issue.
Lately it has become apparent to factory manag¬
ers that the average capacity of a woman is less than
half the average of a man’s capacity, and that is why
they doubled his wage.
The third among the five issues is that the [legal]
testimony of a woman is viewed as half a man’s tes¬
timony. And my word in answering is that the rea¬
son behind the rule is not that Muhammad believed
that the woman is lowly or that she lies in her testi¬
mony. But he sees that the woman is far away from
the battleground of the work that men do, in which
there are many tricks and treacheries. That is in ad¬
dition to the woman’s weak self-confidence, gullibil¬
ity, and lack of discipline. They might trick her by
calling her beautiful. Imagine if they use other words
of flattery and praise?!!
This is the psychology of the woman that Mu¬
hammad, peace be upon him, recognized, so he saw
to it that she be backed up by one of her sex when
she testifies in court. Each would remind the other,
and they would cooperate to confirm the issue they
are testifying about. The classification of testimony
then is a reflection of the belief that women are an¬
gelically naive, and not a belief in their baseness or
dishonesty. However, Muhammad, peace be upon
him, preferred woman to man in some aspects of tes¬
timony: in matters concerning women, the testimony
of a man is not accepted by itself, whereas her testi¬
mony alone is accepted.
This is indication enough about popular trust in
women and its belief in her propriety.
Among the issues on which the civilized world casts
aspersions about Muhammad, peace be upon him, is
religious law of divorce. But this atrocity they now
share with us, on a much wider scale.
Muhammad knew that no matter how much we
try to investigate to make the couple compatible in
their ethics and temperament, there will always be
the possibility of mistakes in this investigation. The
disparity between the couple’s character many times
leads to a souring of marital affection and reducing
the happiness of the family. So they resort then to
separation. In many cases this separation is in the
interest of the woman, as she gets rid of her evil
husband.
Despite that, Muhammad hated divorce and de¬
creed patience. In the Qur’an: “Live with them with
tolerance and justice, even if you do not care for
them. For it may well be that you may not like a thing,
yet God may have endowed it with much goodness.”
[Sura 4, Verse 19]
The Muhammadan revelation encouraged the man
to act contrary to his feelings in consideration for the
woman, so he said to man: If you feel hatred towards
your wife, who says that this hatred does not have a
lot of goodness in it? Be patient with her then.
To that extent Muhammad encouraged people to
avoid divorce. But his followers did not follow his
shari‘a, so calamity befell them. And this cannot be
blamed on him. Don’t you see that with natural laws
themselves, such as the laws of health and sickness,
for example, people don’t follow them, so misery
befalls them? This is not the fault of physicians, nor
the Divine Providence that created those laws. The
fault is with those who contradicted them. Cicero
[Roman orator, 106-43 b.c.] said: “Whoever is un¬
happy, it is his fault.”
The Muslims used divorce to excess. They di¬
vorced with no limit or condition. The Christians
were also excessive [in the opposite direction]: they
did not divorce at all, even when it was necessary.
Both groups ended up miserable, so the Muslims in
Turkey went back to limiting the parameters of di¬
vorce, and the Christians in America and England
expanded the parameters. The result should be a bal¬
anced, reasonable medium in divorce, and that is
what Muhammad wanted in codifying divorce.
Now to the last of the five issues that Muslims are
faulted with: polygamy. My word on this subject
requires a bit of courage in stating. And despite that,
I will do my best to avoid insinuations and imputa¬
tions. I would say first that Muhammad, peace be
upon him, did not address only one class of people
with his laws, as other lawmakers did. He addressed
all classes and all nations, among them the barbaric
nation, the half-civilized nation, and the civilized
nation.
Muhammad, peace be upon him, says to each
nation with regard to polygamy: Take from my flex¬
ible laws what is appropriate to your milieu and your
social situation.
214
‘Abd al-Qadir al-Maghribi
So if one class of people said, “We don’t acknowl¬
edge multiple wives,” Muhammad would tell them:
“Good work, because in my shari‘a, polygamy is per¬
missible and not a duty.” But there would be another
group, in Africa or China for example, constrained by
their social situation or the disposition of their tem¬
perament to adopt polygamy. So when Muhammad
invites these people to his religion, he does not force
their temperament to his preference, and doesn’t ask
them to renounce polygamy, so as not to make it dif¬
ficult for them as long as they are in this stage in their
social evolution. Therefore he allowed them to prac¬
tice polygamy, particularly if one of the couple is bar¬
ren, or that the number of women has increased due
to the demand for men in war, as happened in Europe
[during World War I], or for any other reason.
But we come back and say, Why should we concern
ourselves with the nations that Muhammad has al¬
lowed to have polygamy due to their milieu and tem¬
peraments? These civilized nations themselves have
multiple wives in actual practice and deny it in words,
and insult those who allow polygamy.
Muhammad knew the temperament of human
beings and studied the nature of their masculinity
deeply, for he struggled with this nature face to face
and told them, “Are you in fact not impatient with
one type of food? Are you not driven by your nature
and temperament, or by other causes, to know a sec¬
ond woman other than your legal wife? Wipe this
nature from your souls, and I will wipe polygamy
from my laws.”
And how is denial useful in this issue? If we do
not see, don’t we have ears to hear?
These men that want to know women other than
their legal wives are not told by Muhammad: “Know
them against the law [haram]. And put your offspring
in the homes for abandoned and orphaned children.”
On the contrary, he tells them: “If you have to do it,
know the second woman through religious tolerance.
Know her through a religious official, and don’t
know her at the hands of Satan.”
In the law of Muhammad, allowing a second wife
thus fulfills a need in rebellious human nature, which
cannot be resisted in some persons.
All who expect polygamy to pose a danger to the
family should also expect the same from taking mis¬
tresses. The family is exposed to dangers in non-
Islamic milieus, just as it is in Islamic milieus.
We have learned that some lawmakers in Europe
are currently thinking of promulgating a law concern¬
ing secret multiple cohabitation, in order to limit the
scope of its evil, and to save the family from the
misery that it causes.
This is, ladies and gentlemen, what 1 wanted to say
on the subject of Muhammad and woman.
And you have seen that Muhammad came to
preach in favor of woman and to give her freedom.
And that divorce and the other of the five issues [just
discussed] do not taint this freedom in any way.
Rather, if Muhammad, peace be upon him, wanted
woman to be free in a judicial sense, he also wanted
her to be free in an ethical sense.
The free woman who is not free makes life bitter.
As for the truly free woman, she becomes the source
of comfort, a pearl in the heart of gatherings, and a
star on the forehead of her nation. 4
4. [A white blaze on the forehead of a horse has long been
a prized mark of beauty in Arab culture.—Trans.]
28
Halide Edib Adivar
Turkey Faces West
Halide Edib Adivar (Turkey, 1882-1964) gained worldwide renown as one of the first
female writers and activists of the contemporary Islamic world. She received a traditional
primary education, then enrolled as one of the first Muslim pupils at the American Col¬
lege for Girls, a missionary school in Istanbul. During high school and afterward, she trans¬
lated numerous European novels and was deeply impressed by literary naturalism. Fol¬
lowing the Constitutional Revolution of 1908, she began writing newspaper articles
promoting Social Darwinism, positivism, andTurkism. Following World War I, Halide Edib
participated in the founding of the Wilson Principles Society in Istanbul, but she turned
to nationalism after the Greek occupation of Izmir in 19 19. In fiery public speeches, she
maintained that European bias against Islam had played an important role in the heavy-
handed punishment and occupation of the Ottoman Empire. She joined the nationalist
campaign in Anatolia and served at the front as a journalist with the rank of corporal
(later sergeant). Yet her subsequent opposition to nationalist leader Mustafa Kemal
(Ataturk, 1881-1938) caused her to leave Turkey in 1924, returning only in 1939. Dur¬
ing this period she lectured and wrote prolifically in English. In her most important reli¬
gious statement, a series of lectures delivered in India—excerpted in this selection—Halide
Edib argued that separation of religion and state would rejuvenate Turkey and Islam. In
1940, she became professor and chair of the English Literature Department at Istanbul
University; she also represented Izmir in the Turkish parliament between 1950 and 1954,'
The Turk perhaps was never a nationalist in politics.
Empire builders rarely are. Their ultimate and high¬
est ideal in politics is inevitably some form of democ¬
racy. When the Turk became a Muslim, the demo¬
cratic side of his nature was strengthened, for
democracy is the dominating aspect of Islam. That
part of Western idealism which preached equality
among men took hold of the Ottoman mind at once.
The Ottomans could not grasp the nationalist side of
it, the separation of small groups into independent
states. For their lack of understanding in this field
they suffered more than any other race by the advent
of Western ideals in the Near East.
Down to Tanzimat [Ottoman administrative re¬
forms of the 19th century], the Ottoman Turks had be¬
lieved that only Muslims could be politically equal.
With Tanzimat they believed that all men could and
ought to be politically equal, and once the principle
applied in a mixed society of men, they could not
conceive of the reason for political disintegration.
This was their external lack of understanding.
In the advent of Western Ideals there was a greater
and more important question. Islamic society was
something different from Western society. Could it
be possible to effect an all-round Westernization
without altering the very nature of Islamic society?
The Muslim state might reform its army upon mod¬
em lines, it might adopt the mechanical side of civi¬
lization with regard to transport, it might open spe¬
cial schools for training in certain professions and
arts; it might even proclaim the equality of Muslims
and non-Muslims—Islam had already proclaimed the
rights of man in other lines a thousand years ago. But
was it possible to alter the nature of Islamic society
Halide Edib, Turkey Faces West: A Turkish View of Recent
Changes and their Origin (New Haven, Conn.: Yale Univer¬
sity Press, 1930), pp. 76-82, 226-232. Introduction by M.
§iikrii Hanioglu.
1. Ugurol Barlas, Halide Edib Adivar: Biyografya,
Bibliyografya (Halide Edib Adivar: Biography, Bibliogra¬
phy) (Istanbul, Turkey: Yurtta§ Yaymlari, 1963); Ay§e
Durakbaja, Halide Edib: Turk Modemle$mesi ve Feminizm
(Halide Edib: Turkish Modernization and Feminism )
(Istanbul, Turkey: lleti§im. 2000); Inci Enginiin. Halide
Edib Adivar (Halide Edib Adivar ) (Ankara, Turkey: Kiiltur
Bakanligi, 1989).
215
216 Halide Edib Adivar
without altering Islam in itself? And what was the
dominating difference between Islamic society and
that of the West which did not allow Westernization
internally? It was the Islamic law. No change could
be made in that aspect. Divine law administered by
the ‘ulama’ [religious scholars] of the realm in Is¬
lamic society did not permit change. Hence superfi¬
cially, the creative and critical faculties of the Turk
seemed far behind those of Western peoples. But was
Muslim Turkish society as immobile and stagnant as
the other Islamic societies? Was there not an objec¬
tive psychology at work all the time beneath the sur¬
face, trying to change or throw off all obstacles to
its growth? We can find the right key to the changes
in Turkey in recent times, in a study of the Turkish
soul, struggling between religious orthodoxy and a
freer, more vital racial instinct, in a long effort to
express itself. As soon as we penetrate beneath the
surface immobility, and observe how he freed him¬
self from the rigid Arab rationalism of the Islamic
Middle Ages, and how he threw off the tyranny of
the Persian spirit which had tied him down to the
repetition of ancient and uncongenial forms of
thought, we see clearly the difference between the
Muslim Turk and the other Muslims in the world.
The most static aspect of life in Islam is law, and
religious law had given its character and shape to
Turkish Islamic society. But from the very moment
when the Turks had accepted Islam, and originated
the class— ‘ulama ’—which was to preserve them
from stepping outside the Divine Law, they began
unconsciously to take those steps for change. In the
eyes of the world, modern Turkey has only recently
become a secular state, and to the casual observer it
looks as though the change had been carried out by
a single act overnight, and forced upon the Turks by
the power of a terrorist government. But Turkey was
not changed by one single step from a theocratic state
into a secular one. The change is a logical culmina¬
tion and result of a series of lesser changes in devel¬
opment. Nor is it yet complete. The final and latest
secularization is only understandable [in the context
of change] in the Ottoman Empire which has been
going on for centuries.
The Arab mind has a metaphysical conception of
the universe. It looks upon legislative power as be¬
longing to God, and executive power to the caliph;
and it regards the doctors of law as intermediaries
between God and the caliph, who are to control the
executive and see that he carries out the laws of God.
If he fails, they are to cancel his contract and elect
another caliph by the consent of the Islamic people.
Semites, as well as Arabs, had formulated this con¬
ception of Divine Law before Muhammad did so. It
was the Scriptures which ruled the Semitic peoples,
and it is the Scriptures which rule them still.
It was different with the Turk. In his pre-Islamic
state he had been accustomed to be ruled by man¬
made laws, and he is by nature more inclined than
the other Islamic peoples to separate religion from
the ordinary business of life. It is true that his laws
were made for him by his chiefs, but all the same they
were man-made. This streak in his psychology made
itself felt immediately during the earliest centuries
after his adoption of Islam.
When the Ottoman Turks founded the vast and
complicated Ottoman state, sultans and governments
began to make laws outside the Divine Law. It is true
that these began as royal enactments and dealt with
military and feudal organizations, which were virgin
soil and unforeseen by the shari’a (Islamic law).
Nevertheless, the precedent was contrary to the teach¬
ings of the orthodox doctors, and no Arab, no other
Muslim state, would have dared to do such a thing.
This was the first stage. Sulayman [reigned 1520-
1566], called the Magnificent in the West, is known
in Turkish history as the Lawgiver ( Qanuni ), the
maker of laws. The very name is a direct contradic¬
tion of orthodox principles [that call God the sole
Lawgiver]. Sulayman created the embryo of a crimi¬
nal code which gradually replaced some of the texts
of the shari’a in penal matters. Such primitive mea¬
sures as the cutting off of a thief s hand, the stoning
of adulterers, and the flogging of wine drinkers, were
replaced by imprisonment or fines. They are still
applied in the kingdom of Ibn Sa‘ud [circa 1880-
1953, founder of Saudi Arabia], who prides himself
on having restored the Hijaz to Islam.
In Sulayman’s time the word qanun (man-made
law) entered Turkish jurisprudence side by side with
shari’a (God-made law). The qanun was at first in
an inferior position, but it gradually gained ground
and expanded until it overshadowed the shari’a. The
very' name qanun is a direct contradiction of ortho¬
dox principles, and in those days out of all the Islamic
states it existed only in the Ottoman Empire.
The proclamation of Tanzimat, 1839, which de¬
clared the political equality of all the church nations
[that is, religious communities], also introduced an
entirely new series of man-made laws. A criminal
TURKEY FACES WEST 217
code, taken from the French code of 1810, a com¬
mercial code, and a judicial organization copied from
France, with a Tribunal of the First Instance, Courts
of Appeal, and a Court of Cassation, all came into
existence. After Tanzimat , therefore, two kinds of
courts existed side by side in the Ottoman Empire:
(1) The shari'a courts, with only Muslim judges,
which were only concerned with family matters,
marriage, divorce, and inheritance of the Muslims in
the Empire; (2) the nizamiye [state] courts, where
Christian, Muslim, and Jewish judges sat side by side
and judged all the Ottoman subjects according to the
laws of the realm. The penal section was derived
entirely from the French legal system; the civil sec¬
tion was the codified shari‘a , or Mecelle[-i Ahkam-i
‘Adliye, Compendium of Legal Statutes, 1876]; and
the procedure throughout was French. Hence, by the
middle of the nineteenth century, the Ottoman Em¬
pire had passed from God-made to man-made laws
in a very large section of her jurisprudence.
To all these changes the ‘ulama’, the doctors and
judges of Islamic law, made no opposition. With the
Turkish outlook on life, which is readier to separate
this and the next world from each other, they ac¬
cepted changes in the laws which would have made
the ‘ulama ’ of other countries denounce the Turks
as heretics. No other believers in the Islamic law but
Turks in those days could have permitted a separate
criminal code and a separate commercial code with¬
out deeming the foundations of Islam shaken. Yet the
opposition to these changes had not come from the
‘ulama ’ but from the rank and file of the army, which
was reactionary up to the time of Mahmud [II, Otto¬
man sultan, reigned 1808-1839]. The Muslim Turks
of the ‘ulama ’ class considered only one feature of
the Islamic law as unchangeable, that part which
concerned the family, and this they intended to keep
within the boundary of God-made law. [...]
The adoption of the Swiss code in place of the
Islamic family law in 1926 was a reform of a much
more serious nature. It could have been put through
without much coercion, although there would have
been some bitter criticism.
A year after the sultan’s government had been
abolished [in 1922] in Constantinople [Istanbul],
there was serious discussion whether the revised fam¬
ily law of 1916, abrogated by the sultan’s govern¬
ment in 1919, should be restored with or without
alterations. In 1924 the National Assembly took up
the question, and it aroused great interest, especially
among the women of the cities and of Constantinople
in particular. At a large meeting of women in the
Nationalist Club there was elected a committee of
women to study the situation and send a petition to
the National Assembly. The committee made a se¬
lection of the family laws of Sweden, France, En¬
gland, and Russia, and having found the Swedish law
most desirable, it sent a translated copy with a peti¬
tion attached to it to the National Assembly. Their
petition had at the time no definite result. But there
was a group of very keenly interested young depu¬
ties working for the adoption of a Western code rather
than the restoration of the revised family law of 1916.
Mahmut Esat Bey [Bozkurt, 1892-1943], the young
deputy of Smyrna [Izmir] who became Minister of
Justice in 1925, was one of the leading spirits in the
movement. In 1926, the law following the Swiss code
was passed. It can be termed perhaps one of the two
most significant and important changes that have
taken place during the dictatorship. This particular
law will mean the final unification of the Turk with
the family of European nations, by giving the Turk¬
ish family that kind of stability which constitutes the
Western Ideal of the family.
The adoption of the Swiss law, which is entirely
Western, instead of revision and alteration of the Is¬
lamic family law, which could have made marriage
a freer if a less stable institution and brought it nearer
to the present Russian family law, was one more tri¬
umph in Turkey of the Western Ideal over the East¬
ern Ideal, and one of more permanent import than is
realized at present.
The educational rights that Turkish women have
gained are no longer questioned even by the small¬
est minority, and the sphere of women’s work has
been constantly widening. It is perhaps a blessing that
they have not obtained the vote. Thus they have been
protected from the danger of being identified with
party politics, and their activities outside the politi¬
cal world could not be stopped for political reasons.
In the Turkish home, women continue to be the
ruling spirit, more so, perhaps, because the majority
contribute to the upkeep by their labor. At the present
time, offices, factories, and shops are filled with
women workers in the cities; and in addition to their
breadwinning jobs, and sometimes in connection with
them, women have interested themselves in child
welfare and hygiene, and in organizing small associa¬
tions to teach poor women embroidery, sewing, weav¬
ing, and so on. The favorite profession of Turkish
218 Halide Edib Adivar
women today, after teaching, is medicine. All this is
the city aspect of the situation. In the rural districts,
women still continue to live their old life with its
drudgery, and will continue to live under these con¬
ditions until a more up-to-date agricultural system is
adopted and the mdiments of education can be given
in those districts. It would not be an underestimate to
say that something like 90 percent of the Turkish
women are very hard workers; the question is not how
to provide more work for them but how to train them
better for their work and to give them more leisure.
The small percentage of the idle rich (much smaller
in Turkey than elsewhere) do on a miniature scale what
the idle rich of other countries do. Unfortunately,
Turkey is judged by the life and attitude of these idlers,
who are conspicuous to the eyes of the traveler, rather
than by the hard-working majority.
On the whole, within the last twenty years women
in Turkey as elsewhere have profited by changes
more than men. It has been fortunate for Turkey that
the emancipation of women there was the result of
an all-party program rather than a sex struggle. The
contribution of the Republic [of Turkey, founded
1923] to women’s social emancipation in the intro¬
duction of the new civil code has brought the move¬
ment to its highest and historically its most impor¬
tant stage. But a generation at least must pass before
its full effects can be seen. The general criticism that
with Westernization a great deal of evil and West¬
ern immorality has penetrated into Turkish customs
is not very important. The evil affects a small num¬
ber of the idle, while the good penetrates into the
majority, although more slowly.
In 1928, the clause in the Constitution which de¬
clared Islam the state religion was abolished. In the
foreign press this step was criticized very severely,
on the ground that it amounted to the abolition of
religion in Turkey. This criticism was not only su¬
perficial but inaccurate. If religion, in the best sense,
is in any danger of losing its hold on the Turkish
people, it is not due to absence of governmental in¬
terference but to governmental interference itself.
The men who sponsored this measure may or may
not have been atheists, but the measure itself does not
do away with religion. No secular state can logically
have a basic law which establishes a state religion.
The abolition of the clause from the Constitution was
therefore in true and necessary accord with the na¬
ture of the new Turkish state at its last stage of secu¬
larization. “Render therefore unto Caesar the things
which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that
are God’s.” [Bible, Books of Matthew, chapter 22,
verse 21; Mark, chapter 12, verse 17; Luke, chap¬
ter 20, verse 25] The Turks have at last rendered up
the things that were Caesar’s or the state’s; but Cae¬
sar or the state still keeps things which belong to God.
Unless the Presidency of Religious Affairs is made
free, unless it ceases to be controlled by the office of
the Prime Minister, it will always be a governmen¬
tal instrument. In this respect the Muslim community
is less privileged and less free than the Christian
Patriarchates. These are free institutions which de¬
cide upon all questions of dogma and religion accord¬
ing to the convictions of their particular group. The
Islamic community is chained to the policy of the
government. This situation is a serious impediment
to the spiritual growth of Islam in Turkey, and there
is always a danger in it of the use of religion, for
political ends.
Now that the state has freed itself entirely from
religious control, it should in turn leave Islam alone.
Not only should it declare, “Every major Turkish
citizen is free to adopt the religion he (or she) wishes
to adopt,” but it should also allow the Muslim com¬
munity to teach its religion to its youth. Now that the
schools give no religious instruction, and the reli¬
gious institutions are abolished, the Islamic commu¬
nity, if it is going to last as a religious community,
must create its own means of religious teaching, its
own moral and spiritual sanctions. Further, in the
ritual and in the fundamentals of worship, there are
likely to be changes among the Muslims in Turkey.
Those changes should be allowed to take place with¬
out governmental interference. The occasional pro¬
posals by the university professors of new forms of
worship in Islam—such as substituting organ music
for vocal music, entering the mosques without tak¬
ing off the shoes, placing benches so that the faith¬
ful may pray seated, and doing away with a number
of complicated body movements in prayer—have
met with profound displeasure. All these changes
might take place by the wishes of the people, but
governmental interference in this most sacred part of
men’s rights would constitute a dangerous precedent.
It would fetter the religious life of the Turks and bring
politics into religion. The fundamental meaning of
the long and very interesting phases of secularization
is that Turkish psychology separates this world from
TURKEY FACES WEST 219
the next. To take religion out of the political state,
but at the same time to keep the state in religious
affairs, is one of the contradictory aspects of the last
phase which must be corrected.
Not only in Turkey, but wherever religion is in¬
terfered with by governments, it becomes a barrier.
and an unremovable one, to peace and understand¬
ing. Yet the fundamental doctrine of every religion
is peace and the brotherhood of men. If only religions
could be freed from political influences all over the
world, the barriers between peoples of different
creeds would break down sooner than one supposes.
This page intentionally left blank
SECTION 4
Russian Empire
This page intentionally left blank
29
Ismail Bey Gasprinskii
First Steps toward Civilizing
the Russian Muslims
Ismail Bey Gasprinskii (Crimea, 1851-1914), Tatar reformer, educator, and publicist, was
the most influential architect of Islamic modernism among the Turkic subjects of the Russian
Empire. Gasprinskii—also known by his Tatar name, Gaspirali—was educated in both
traditional Islamic and Russian schools, and was being trained for a career in the Russian
military until he abandoned his studies to spend three years in France and the Ottoman
Empire. Returning to Crimea in 1875, he became a school instructor and served four
years as mayor of Bakhchisarai, From the early 1880s until his death, Gasprinskii devoted
his efforts to challenging intellectual assumptions and sociocultural practices that he be¬
lieved condemned Muslims to cultural inferiority in the face of modern Western techno¬
logical, military, political, economic, and intellectual hegemony. His primary tool was print,
notably the Russian - and Tatar-language newspaper PerevodchiklTercuman (The Interpreter),
which Gasprinskii founded and edited for the last thirty years of his life. Education stood
at the center of his modernist project, and Gasprinskii also called for the development of
a common Turkic literary language, the establishment of mutual-aid societies, and coop¬
eration with the Russian government and people, Gasprinskii’s influence, intellectually mod¬
erate and consummately practical, came to be felt throughout Turkic Russia as well as in
Turkey, Egypt, and South Asia. The essay translated here assesses the first two decades
of Islamic modernism in Russia, highlighting key directions and accomplishments and (al¬
though not included here) listing a bibliography of the "new" writing, fiction and nonfic¬
tion, that he felt defined the cutting edge of the new society. 1
At the present time, despite the fact that the Muslim
subjects of Russia lag far behind [other peoples], and
that they share in so little of modern life, this great
[Muslim] society is not all that incognizant [of what
is happening around it]; and one cannot deny that
within it a revival is taking place. Granted that this
revival is not imposing; and so long as you do not
pay close attention you will not even notice it. Yet it
is enough for us that with some attention it can be
observed, because it undoubtedly represents the be¬
ginning of progress and civilization.
Twenty or twenty-five years ago, God be praised,
although a considerable number of [Muslim] reli¬
gious works were published in Russia, only three
items dealing with science and literature were writ¬
ten in our language [that is, all of the Turkic dialects
of the Russian Empire], Of these, one was the
[Qutadghu] Bilik [The Wisdom of Royal Glory, by
Ismail Bey Gasprinskii, Mebadi-yi Temeddun-i Islamiyan-i Rus
(First Steps Toward Civilizing the Russian Muslims), translated
from Tatar by Edward J. Lazzerini in “Gadidism at the Turn
of the Twentieth Century: A View from Within,” Cahiers du
monde russe et sovietique (Anna/s of the Russian and Soviet
World), volume 16, number 2, April-June 1975, pp. 245-277.
First published in 1901. Introduction by Edward J. Lazzerini.
1. Alan W. Fisher, "A Model Leader for Asia, Ismail
Gaspirali,” and Edward J. Lazzerini, “Ismail Bey Gasprinskii
(Gaspirali): The Discourse of Modernism and the Russians,”
pp. 29-47 and 48-70, in Edward A. Allworth, ed., Tatars of
the Crimea, 2d ed. (Durham. N.C.: Duke University Press,
1998); Edward J. Lazzerini, “Ismail Bey Gasprinskii’s
PerevodchiklTercuman: A Clarion of Modernism,” pp. 143—
156 in H. B. Paksoy. editor. Central Asian Monuments,
(Istanbul. Turkey: Isis Press, 1992); Thomas Kuttner, “Russian
Jadidism and the Islamic World: Ismail Gasprinskii in Cairo.
1908,” Cahiers du monde russe et sovietique (Annals of the
Russian and Soviet World), volume 16. 1975, pp. 383^424;
Hakan Kirimh, National Movements and National Identity
among the Crimean Tatars (1905-1916) (Leiden. Netherlands:
E. J. Brill, 1996).
223
224 Ismail Bey Gasprinskii
Yusuf Khass Hajib, 11th century] published by the
Orientalist [Vasilii Vasil’evich] Radlov [Russia,
1837-1918], the second was the almanac of Qayyum
Efendi Nasiri [Tatarstan, 1825-1902], and the third
comprised the comedies of Mirza Fatih ‘Ali
Akhundov [Azerbaijan, 1812-1878]. Two of these
works appeared in Kazan, while the third was pub¬
lished in Tiflis. At that same time, a Turkic-language
newspaper entitled Ekingi [The Sower ] was founded
in Baku by Hasan Bey Melikov [Zerdabi, Azerbaijan,
1842-1907], Although it had only a brief existence
[1875-1877], the newspaper cast a ray of light, like
a lightning bolt, upon [long] dormant ideas.
Even though a few works such as the tale of Tahir
ve Ziihre [Tahir and Ziihre ] were available [at that
time], these cannot be included [in our discussion]
because of their lack of literary significance. [Among
Muslims] the state of general knowledge was regret¬
tably pitiful. Unaware of the discoveries of Johannes
Kepler [German astronomer, 1571-1630] and [Isaac]
Newton [English physicist, 1642-1727], Muslim so¬
ciety viewed the world and universe through the eyes
of Ptolemy [ancient astronomer, 2nd century], and was
heedless of both contemporary affairs and the lifestyles
of other nations. In short, whatever may have been the
circumstance of the civilized world 400 years ago, we
Muslims find ourselves today in exactly the same cir¬
cumstances; that is, we are 400 years behind!
But now, in this same Islamic world characterized
by a dearth of knowledge, a lack of information, and
torpor, one can discern a slight revival, a degree of
awakening and understanding. This revival is not the
result of some external influence, but is a marvelous,
natural phenomenon bom from within.
In 1881 we published an essay in Russian entitled
Russkoe musuTmantsvo [Russian Islam], Therein we
called upon Muslims to write and translate works
concerning science, literature, and contemporary
progress. Praise God, for we were fortunate that our
appeal coincided with the intentions and thoughts of
many others. As a result, today, some twenty years
later, as many as 300 scientific and literary works
have been published in our own language. I realize
that for a people numbering in the millions, the pub¬
lication of 300 items in twenty years is not a great
deal. Nevertheless, compared with the three works
that I mentioned above, 100 times those three is not
insignificant.
Generally speaking, the contents of these 300
national works are such as to encourage people to
read and learn. Among the books themselves are
those that discuss geography, introductory philoso¬
phy, astronomy, the preservation of health, and other
useful knowledge. “New method” primers and read¬
ing books, plays, and one or two national novels
make up the literary contributions.
The authors of the above are young mullas who
have been trained in our national madrasas [semi¬
naries] and who, through self-education, have ac¬
quired scientific knowledge. But those youth who
have entered the [Russian] gymnasia and universi¬
ties have not yet shown a service to our national lit¬
erature. Although the mullas have taken many steps
forward, these others have just made a beginning.
There is a very simple explanation for this regret¬
table state of affairs. While our enlightened, educated
Muslims know Russian and European languages, and
while they enter various professions such as medi¬
cine, engineering, mining, and law, they are unable
to read and write in their own national language!
There is no educated Russian who does not read and
write his own native tongue, no educated Austrian,
Pole, Georgian, or Armenian who is not literate in
his own national language. Unfortunately, this is not
the case with our people.
Above all else, Islam makes two demands [on its
adherents]: one is education, the other is prayer. As
a consequence, in every place where Muslims are
found, a maktab [primary school] is built for the
former and a mosque for the latter. Depending upon
the locality, they are constructed either of stone,
wood, or felt cloth. Those of sedentary Muslims are
found in fixed places; those of the nomads are por¬
table and travel along with them. Everyone knows
that the Islamic world’s largest and most important
buildings and building complexes consist of maktabs
and mosques. In every village, in every quarter,
somehow or other one will find a place of instruc¬
tion. In Russia, at a time when education was hardly
considered, and there were only two Russian schools
to be found in the whole country, every Muslim vil¬
lage had one maktab apiece. But if in former days
these schools sufficed and were competent, we must
all acknowledge that to meet the demands of today
they are in need of reform.
For several years I was in the teaching profession,
and [during that time] I became intimately acquainted
with conditions in the Russian schools and Muslim
maktabs. [In the latter] the poor students would rock
FIRST STEPS TOWARD CIVILIZING THE RUSSIAN MUSLIMS 225
at their reading desks for six or seven hours every day
for five or six years. There were many nights when I
was unable to sleep because of my bitterness and re¬
gret at seeing them deprived of the ability to write and
of a knowledge of the catechism and other matters, and
their inability to acquire, in the end, anything other
than the talent for repeating an Arabic sentence.
School time was being wasted. The teaching of
skills, techniques, the Russian language, and other
matters was [so inadequate] that a fifth-year maktab
student could neither perform his daily prayers prop¬
erly nor write a simple letter. A remedy had to be
found for this state of affairs. It was necessary to
complete the teaching of religion well and in a short
time, and then to find a way to provide [the students]
with the skills, languages, and information needed
for today’s world.
It was because of this that we opened a discus¬
sion of the “new method” in 1884 in Terjuman [The
Interpreter ], the newspaper that we had founded in
1883. A graded and phonetic primer was published,
and a maktab in Bakhchisarai was changed over to
this method and system. The visible progress made
by the students of this maktab compelled other
schools to adopt the method. In six months, after
mastering reading and writing in the Turkic language
and the four basic arithmetical processes, the novice
students had begun lessons to learn Arabic, and were
reading a book that taught the elements of religion.
[Their successes] reverberated in far-off provinces,
and today the “phonetic method” has spread all the
way to Chinese Turkistan. [In the intervening period]
over 500 old [method] maktabs have been reformed.
Because the opportunity presented itself, Russian
language teachers have been invited to a number of
maktabs, and one hears that perfect Russian has been
acquired with ease (for example, in maktabs in
Bakhchisarai, Sheki, Kuldzha, Shirvan, Nakchivan,
and other places).
Great success has been achieved in awakening
public opinion concerning the maktab, because
Muslims are an alert people who, once they are ex¬
posed to something, come to know and understand
it. Consequently, I am hopeful that there will be other
reforms and that the idea of change will not be re¬
served only for primary schools. Reform of Arab
madrasas as well has been engraved on the heart of
the nation. After spending eight or ten years study¬
ing grammar, which is the primary section of the
Arabic and Islamic sciences, and after “imprisoned
in the madrasa ” for 15 years, the student does not
know Arabic. He will have come across the names
of [religious scholars such as Abu Hamid Muham¬
mad al-]Ghazzali [1058-1111], [Muhammad ibn
Isma‘il al-]Bukhari [810-870], and [Sa‘d al-Din]
Taftazani [1322-1389], but will have had no ac¬
quaintance with the likes of ‘Ali Husayn Ibn Sina
[scientist and philosopher, 980-1037], [Abu Ibrahim
al-]Farabi [lexicographer, died 961], or Ibn Khaldun
[historian, 1332-1406]. Consequently, it dawns on
many men that this is not a very sound or reasonable
way to terminate their education. Thanks to this [re¬
alization], and with the intention of renovating the
educational method, they have been rather success¬
ful in reforming and reorganizing the following
madrasas: the Zinjirli in Bakhchisarai, the Barudi in
Kazan, the Osmanov in Ufa, and the Husaynov in
Orenburg. In order to facilitate the reaching of Ara¬
bic, newly organized grammar books have been pub¬
lished. For example, there are the works of Ahmed
Hadi Efendi Maksudi [1867-1941] [published] in
Kazan.
The search for knowledge does not take this path
alone. Profiting from the state-run primary schools,
Muslim students are entering [Russian] gymnasia and
universities in order to become acquainted with con¬
temporary progress and learning, and the number
who complete [these schools] is increasing. Twenty
years ago one of our people had received a univer¬
sity education; now such people number more than
100. Fifty Muslim young men who have received a
[Russian] higher education and who have entered the
professions of engineering, medicine, law, et cetera,
can be found in Baku alone. There are also those who
have been educated in, and returned home from,
French and German universities.
It is noteworthy that there is a greater number of
Muslims in the southern provinces who study Rus¬
sian than there is in the inner provinces. We hope that
our coreligionists up and down the Volga will rec¬
ognize that they are being delinquent in this matter,
and that they will endeavor to become acquainted
with contemporary progress through a knowledge of
the Russian language. There are thousands of scien¬
tific and technical works written in Russian; it is
necessary to profit from them.
In a similar way, the national theater is the product
of recent years. Besides the comedies of Mirza Fatih
‘Ali [Akhundov], which have been around for some
226 Ismail Bey Gasprinskii
time, several new comedies have been written and
published. Theatrical plays in the national language
have appeared in Baku, Karabagh, Gendzhe, and
Bakhchisarai. In Baku, a permanent theatrical com¬
pany has been formed, and one or two plays have
been translated from Russian. Armenian, Georgian,
and Jewish girls serve the roles of women. We are
thankful [for all of this], but it cannot be denied that
our theater rests on one leg.
One notices traces of awakening and progress among
Muslim women, who have remained even further
behind in comparison with Muslim men. If you want
proof [of progress in this area], I can only give you a
little. In the last days of winter there is a white flower
that grows in the snow; surely you know it. If this
blooming flower is not proof that summer has ar¬
rived, it is a certain sign that the beginning of sum¬
mer is near. There are some signs just like this one
[with regard to the advancement of our women].
Twenty-five years ago [Khanifa Khanim,] the re¬
spected wife of Hasan Bey [Melikov Zerdabi] (who
was one of our journalists), was the only Muslim
woman who had received an education; now there
exist perhaps twenty such women. In St. Petersburg,
in a women’s medical [nursing?] school, three Mus¬
lim women are studying medical science, and one is
practicing medicine. It is well known that two Mus¬
lim women are writing, and their results are being
published. Let them be examples and models for
emerging authors. This world is one of hope; why
should we despair?
Charity, giving alms, and helping others are funda¬
mental to the Islamic faith. Because of this, God be
praised, we can say that there is no one who does not
tithe, give alms and [other assistance]. All contrib¬
ute within their means, and thus every year a great
deal of money is dispensed in this way. Nevertheless,
while there are those who help themselves to these
charities, there are others too ashamed to do so and,
as a result, go hungry. Aware that there is a lot for
some and nothing for others, the public has begun to
rectify the situation. In recent years, to provide order
to charitable activities and to increase the opportu¬
nities for such projects, the idea of the “charitable
society” has emerged. Twenty-five years ago in all
of Russia there was only one Muslim charitable so¬
ciety, in Vladikavkaz. Today such societies have
been established and are performing their tasks in
each of the following places: Khankerman, Kazan,
Troitsk, Semipalatinsk, Ufa, and Hadzhi Terhan.
[The extent of] publishing activity and the book
trade is the most concrete testimony to the degree of
advancement and progress of a nation; it is the most
direct proof. Twenty years ago there were two print¬
ing presses in Muslim hands: that of the ‘Abdullin
Tag publishing house in Kazan, and of the Insizade
press in Tiflis. Now there exist the “Terjuman” press
in Bakhchisarai, the press of Ilias Mirza Boragani
[1852-1942] in St. Petersburg, of the Karimov broth¬
ers in Kazan, of Mulla [Ghilman ibn] Ibrahim
Karimov [1841-1902] in Orenburg, and of Doctor
Akhundov and ‘Ali Merdan Bey [Topchibashev,
1862-1934] in Baku. In all, we have progressed from
two such establishments to eight.
I am leaving it up to each reader to make his own
evaluation as to the degree of progress and advance¬
ment that has been made in each of the areas [of
Muslim life] about which I have been writing.
30
Munawwar Qari
What Is Reform?
Munawwar Qari Abdurrashidkhan oghli (Turkistan-Uzbekistan, 1878-1931) was the lead¬
ing reformist figure in Tashkent, the capital of Russian Turkistan. Bom in a family of Is¬
lamic scholars, Munawwar Qari received a seminary education in Tashkent and Bukhara.
He opened Tashkent's first new-method school in 1901, which soon became the largest
and best organized in the city. Munawwar Qari also wrote many textbooks for such
schools, and ran a publishing house specializing in modernist works. He was also editor
and publisher of The Sun, one of the region's first nongovernmental newspapers. He
continued to work in the field of education in the early Soviet period, but fell afoul of the
regime by the late 1920s and was arrested and sent off to prison camp in 1931. The
editorial translated here provides a succinct account of the Central Asian modernists’
critique of their society and their desiderata of reform, as articulated during the optimis¬
tic days in the wake of the Russian Revolution of 1905.'
For several years, newspapers have been writing
about the need for the reform of schools, colleges,
the [Muslim] Spiritual Administration, morals, the
government, et cetera, et cetera. No rational person
can deny that reason and tradition, the shari'a [Is¬
lamic law] and the present age, all require these re¬
forms. All recognize this. But reform doesn’t come
about merely by our recognizing the need for it. It
needs action and effort. Therefore men devoted to
the nation have appeared from every direction, en¬
deavoring to do what is necessary for reform. Under
their leadership, in many provinces [of Russia] we
see, if nothing else, the reform of schools and col¬
leges, where subjects suitable to the present age are
being taught according to the principles of the sci¬
ence of education.
Let’s come to Turkistan: Are we Turkistanis heed¬
ing the example of our coreligionists and doing some¬
thing to reform ourselves? And have we recognized
that all aspects of our existence are in need of reform?
No, gentlemen, I dare not answer this question, for
while there are many among us who, aware of the
contemporary world, recognize the fact that all as¬
pects of our society, but especially our schools and
education, are in need of reform, there are also many
who, having spent all their lives as if in a dark house,
[Munawwar Qari Abdurrashidkhan oghli], “Islah ne
demakdadur” (What Is Reform?), Khurshid (The Sun),
Tashkent, Turkistan, September 28, 1906, p. 1. Translation
from Uzbek and introduction by Adeeb Khalid.
isolated from everybody, consider all reform to be
corruption, and portray all reformers as mischief-
mongers. Under their influence, Muslims [are con¬
tent to] sell their happiness in the afterlife in return
for banquets and parties, and laying out feasts for
religious leaders and officials. As a result, they go
not just into debt but cannot even pay their rents. Fie,
fie—such is [our] happiness in this world and the
next. Is this situation not in need for reform? Indeed,
the things most in need of reform are [precisely] our
banquets and parties. Our honor, indeed our human¬
ity, depends on this.
Our whole aim in working day and night and ac¬
cumulating wealth seems to be to populate these
banquets and parties and thus to gain fame and
honor in society. Therefore the pomp and expenses
involved in these grows every year, and these in¬
novations have become habit among us. If the poor
do not host these banquets and parties, they are re¬
viled by people; if they do so, they are forced to
postpone them for many years to accumulate [the
necessary money], and therefore their sons remain
uncircumcised until the ages of fourteen or fifteen.
If we look at these banquets and parties honestly, it
will be obvious that they produce no good and are
nothing but extravagance.
1. Sirojiddin Ahmad, "Munavvar Qori,” Sharq yulduzi
(Star of the East), number 5, 1992, pp. 105-119; Adeeb
Khalid, The Politics of Muslim Cultural Reform: Jadidism in
Central Asia (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998).
227
228 Munawwar Qari
Although some faults may not be apparent to us
because they have become habit, they are quite ob¬
vious to foreigners. But there are other faults that
appear detestable even to our own eyes, yet we con¬
tinue in them, claiming that they are the traditions of
our forefathers. The fact is that we have added many
commentaries and glosses to the traditions of our
forefathers. In a couple of years, these commentar¬
ies and glosses become integral parts of the “text”
itself and are associated with our forefathers. There¬
fore, all our acts and actions, our ways, our words,
our schools and seminaries, our methods of teaching,
and our morals are corrupt. If we continue in this way
for another five or ten years, we are in danger of being
dispersed and effaced under the oppression of devel¬
oped nations. But the curtain of ignorance has so shut
our eyes that we don’t [even] know to what extent
we have fallen behind. As for those who do know,
we pay them no heed; indeed, we answer those who
talk of reform with nothing but anger. We are con¬
tent to judge ourselves only with reference to one
another, saying, “I’m richer, or wiser, or more learned
than so and so,” and feel proud of it. That’s why daily
we go down the path of extinction.
O coreligionists, O compatriots! Let’s be just and
compare our situation with that of other, advanced
nations. Let’s secure the future of our coming genera¬
tions and save them from becoming slaves and ser¬
vants of others. The Europeans, taking advantage of
our negligence and ignorance, took our government
from our hands, and are gradually taking over our
crafts and trades. If we do not quickly make an effort
to reform our affairs in order to safeguard ourselves,
our nation, and our children, our future will be ex¬
tremely difficult. Reform begins with a rapid start in
cultivating sciences conforming to our times. Becom¬
ing acquainted with the sciences of the present age
depends upon the reform of our schools and our meth¬
ods of teaching. Our present schools take four or five
years to teach only reading and writing, and our col¬
leges take fifteen to twenty years to study introduc¬
tions [to canonical texts] and the four readings. To
hope for them to impart a knowledge of the sciences
of the present age is as futile as to expect one to reach
out to a bird flying in the sky while standing in a well.
The most necessary and beneficial path for the reform
of schools and colleges for all Muslims is the one laid
out by the resolutions passed at the Muslim congress
in Nizhnii Novgorod [in August 1905]. To endeavor
to implement these plans and regulations in all Mus¬
lim provinces [of the Russian empire], and to estab¬
lish organizations and to counsel on this behalf is the
most sacred responsibility of all learned and wealthy
notables. If we ignore this [now], it will be too late.
31
Ahmed Aghayev
Islam and Democracy
Ahmed Aghayev (Azerbaijan, 1869-1939) was bom into a Shi'i family and, during his
youth, identified his homeland with predominantly Shi‘i Iran, During his studies in Paris,
where he was acquainted with reformist Turks from the Ottoman Empire, he came to
see Azerbaijanis in ethnic rather than religious terms. This emphasis on Turkic identity
did not make him a chauvinist; he decried the communal violence that wracked Baku in
1905 and joined a Peace Committee of twelve pledging their personal wealth against
damage wrought by members of their community. His many contributions to the lively
Baku press, one of whose newspapers he edited in 1906-1907, made him a leading fig¬
ure in the Turkist movement. In 1909, after the Ottoman constitutional revolution, he
traveled in Anatolia and wrote a series of newspaper articles outlining his vision of peaceful
ethno-religious diversity in Ottoman and Russian lands, and arguing for the compatibility
of Islam and democracy—as in the excerpt translated here. After the collapse of the
Russian Empire, he returned to the Caucasus and worked with the newly founded Demo¬
cratic Republic of Azerbaijan (1918-1920). En route to the Paris Peace Conference, he
was detained by the Allied Powers for his work in the Young Turk government and in¬
terned on Malta until 1921. By then, Azerbaijan had been incorporated into the Soviet
Union, and Aghayev—now known by his Turkish name Ahmet Agaoglu—lived out his
life in Turkey, where he contributed to the 1924 constitution and campaigned forfree-
market economic policies. 1
Throughout the world a spirit of awakening has en¬
compassed the Muslims; unusual state revolutions
have occurred in two Muslim states—Persia [1906]
and Turkey [1908]—that are considered the bulwarks
of Islam. [This process] naturally draws the attention
of Europe once again to the study of Muhammad. In
addition, [Muslim] state representatives, publicists,
and scholars are taking an interest—only insofar as
this scholarship is compatible, in its basic origins,
with the state, societal, and ethical ideals—with con¬
temporary life, [and] with the foundations of Euro¬
pean civilization.
Does Islam tolerate free, liberal institutions? Is it
able to adapt itself to the demands of such institu¬
tions? How does it look upon power? Does it permit
Muslims to mingle with other non-Muslim peoples,
Ahmed-bek Aghayev, “Islam i Demokratiya” (Islam and
Democracy), Kaspii (The Caspian), Baku, Azerbaijan, Rus¬
sian Empire, September 5, 1909, p. 3. Translation from Rus¬
sian and introduction by Audrey L. Altstadt.
1. Audrey L. Altstadt, The Azerbaijani Turks: Power and
Identity under Russian Rule (Stanford, Calif.: Hoover Insti¬
tution Press, 1992); Fahri Sakai, Agaoglu Ahmed Bey (An-
does it permit [non-Muslims] to enjoy the same rights
as Muslim peoples?
These questions, awakening interest in Europe,
were picked up from the western press and trans¬
ferred to the Constantinople [press], where they
raised heated debate.
As an answer to these questions, but without say¬
ing a word [directly] about them, the Turkish Shaykh
al-Islam [chief Ottoman religious authority, Mehmed
Cemaleddin Efendi, 1848-1917] issued within days
a brochure in three languages—Turkish, Persian and
Arabic—and these brochures have been sent out by
the thousands to every comer of the Muslim world.
If we consider the high position of the present
Shaykh al-Islam, his authority throughout the Mus¬
lim world, and the fact that the best ‘ulama ’ [religious
scholars] of Turkey took part in writing this brochure
kara, Turkey: Turk Tarih Kurumu Basimevi, 1999); A. Holly
Shissler, Turkish Identity between Two Empires: Ahmet
Agaoglu and the Development of Turkism (London: I. B.
Tauris, 2002); Tadeusz Swietochowski, Russian Azerbaijan,
1905-1920: The Shaping of National Identity in a Muslim
Community (New York: Cambridge University Press. 1985).
229
230 Ahmed Aghayev
and consulted with the Shaykh al-Islam, then this
brochure must be regarded as nothing less than [the
equivalent of] a papal encyclical, the political and
social credo of the Muslim clergy.
The content of this brochure is of interest also for
Russia, with its 25 million Muslim citizens. In Rus¬
sia, as in all Europe, opinion about Islam is sharply
divided. Some, like the late philosopher [Vladimir S.]
Soloviev [1853-1900] and Professor [E. K.] Petrov
[1863-1908] in Russia; [George] Rawlinson [1812—
1902], [Joseph D.] Carlyle [1759-1804], and
[Friedrich] Max Mueller [1823-1900] in England;
Barteleli and Saint-Iner 2 in France consider Islam a
doctrine that is compatible with the foundations of
present-day contemporary civilization and ethics.
Others, such as Ernest Renan [France, 1823-1892]
and [Alfred Le] Chatelier [France, 1855-1929], con¬
sider it an enemy of all culture and all progress.
Renan, for example, sees in past Muslim culture a
movement created in opposition to [the spirit of]
Islam by peoples who converted to Islam and de¬
spised it. This movement perished, in the end, from
obligations [imposed] by Islam itself. He expresses
it literally as follows: “Islam inevitably surrounds the
head of all of its adherents with threefold armor of
fanaticism, prejudice, and ignorance; not one ray of
light can penetrate this armor and enter the mind of
the Muslim.”
This harsh opinion of a prominent thinker and
writer about Islam has divided and still divides many,
and this in turn creates a social opinion and mood
divorced from reality which leads to incorrigible er¬
rors in relation to Muslims.
This is why, to follow the trends of social thought
among Muslims, to be precisely informed about the
character of the evolution achieved by their religion
[and] their worldview, is not only of intellectual in¬
terest but also has sociopolitical meaning.
I am deeply convinced that, notwithstanding all
the accelerated interaction with Muslims and the
huge development of Oriental studies in Europe in
general and in Russia in particular, [Europeans] still
do not understand Islam or Muslims. In the judg¬
ments of Europeans about Muslims, certain elements
still predominate—bias, prejudice, and even intoler-
2. [These may be references to Barthelemy d’Herbelot
(1625-1695) and Georges Saint-Yves (bom 1867), author of
A l 'assaut de l ’Asie: la conquete europeenne en Asie (To the
Assault of Asia: The European Conquest in Asia (1901).—Ed.]
ance, which they [got] from their own ancestors and
which future generations, for centuries, will carry as
an instinct, always ready to be awakened.
A centuries-old battle is not easily forgotten, and
the battle of Christianity with Islam, which began
virtually from the day the latter was bom, is an in¬
delible fact of history! Properly speaking, the battle
is not yet over. Beaten unconscious, having seemed
powerless, defenseless, Islam again awakens, again
wants to take its place, to do its part for the fate of
humanity. This sparks interest, but together with in¬
terest, also some fear. What lies ahead? What re¬
mains? In the face of this question, involuntarily and
unconsciously, old instincts awaken in every Euro¬
pean, as formulated most forcefully in the eighteenth
century by [Francois Marie] Voltaire [French phi¬
losopher, 1694—1778], who put in the mouth of
Muhammad the follow verse:
I must rule the prejudiced universe in the name
of God,
My empire will be destroyed if the man is
recognized.
The famous expert of the East, Mr. [Le] Chatelier,
warned Europe some twenty-five years ago about the
revival of Islam, invited her [Europe] to establish a
coalition against [Islam], and not to permit it to rise. 3
The best independent people, including for example
[Pavel N.] Miliukov [Russian historian and politi¬
cian, 1859-1943], are not able to free themselves
from these old prejudices and their judgments about
Muslims and Islam are always spoiled and distorted
by them.
We are deeply convinced that it is incorrect to
raise even in principle the question of the relation¬
ship of the three monotheistic religions—Christian¬
ity, Judaism and Islam—to contemporary civiliza¬
tion. These religions themselves contain today
elements of contemporary civilization. They proceed
one from the other, they confess one and the same
origin. All of them preach faith in One God. in an
afterlife, in repayment for good and evil. Judaism cre¬
ated Christianity and both together [created] Islam;
this was the last, emerging in a special historical me¬
dium and conditions. [It] created medieval Arab cul¬
ture which through two channels, Byzantium and
Spain, influenced Europe, [and] having acquainted
3. [Le] Chatelier, L'lslam au XIXe siecle [Islam in the
19th Century , 1888],
ISLAM AND DEMOCRACY 23 I
the Christian and Jewish world with ancient Greek
culture, prepared the ground for the epoch of the re¬
naissance of science and art.
In this way, the whole question boils down to this:
How can one understand a given religion in a given
time, the relation between them, and the uses to
which [the religion] is put?
Religion, like science and art, is a force; this force
can be used for good or evil. In the Middle Ages,
Catholic Christianity surely was an obstacle to initia¬
tives; [it] opposed science, art, and the development
of free thought! Jan Huss [Czech religious reformer,
circa 1370-1415], Galileo [Italian astronomer, 1564—
1642], Giordano Bruno [Italian scientist, 1548—
1600], and others underwent torture in the name of
Christianity! But it is not the Gospel that is guilty in
all this; it is its interpreters, the moral torpor, the
mental ignorance of [their medieval] contemporar¬
ies. It is not so anymore; having at one time handed
over Joan of Arc [French leader, circa 1412-1431]
to be burned, having damned her as a fiend of an evil
spirit, the papacy now elevates her to sainthood. The
holy fathers at one time sold indulgences and reli¬
gious offices, and propounded the theory of the Di¬
vine Right [of monarchs] as an unshakable founda¬
tion. Now they consecrate republics, work out the
bases of Christian socialism, and reconcile religion
to the sciences!
It is the same with Islam. Immediately after its
emergence, Islam created one of the most dazzling
civilizations; but then, under the force of known his¬
torical circumstances, the analysis of which is not
part of the present letter, it fell into the hands of
people who were ignorant and savage, who turned it
into an instrument of evil. In the name of Islam wild
blasphemies and horrible crimes were committed;
fires were kindled and people were tortured for their
ideas, feelings, and convictions. But even so, the
Qur’an was no more guilty than was the Gospel for
the horrors of medieval Europe.
Now the Qur’an is undergoing such an evolu¬
tion as the Gospels never did, and in this respect,
the brochure of the Shaykh al-Islam is the brightest
contribution.
32
Abdullah Bubi
Is the Period of Ijtihad Over or Not?
Abdullah Bubi (Tatarstan, 1871-1922) was a famous teacher and reformist theologian
who long opposed the czarist regime. After studying in Arabia, Cairo, and Beirut, he and
his brother returned to their home village of Izh-Bobino and established a reform-style
school. Despite the small size of the village, this school was renowned among Muslims
throughout the Russian Empire as a leader in reformist education, offering a variety of
subjects—even French—in addition to traditional Islamic studies. At the same time, Bubi
participated along with other reformist scholars in congresses of Russian-empire Mus¬
lims, at which he supported demands for democratic rights and called for women's suf¬
frage, In 1911, Russian police charged the Bubi brothers with subversive activities against
the Russian government and closed their school. Their allegedly subversive, anti-Russian,
and antigovemmental activities included close contact with the Ottoman pan-Turkist party
and the propagation of pan-Islamist ideas, including a vision for ending the historical con¬
flict between the Sunni and Shi'i sects. Anti-modernist Islamic scholars cooperated with
Russian prosecutors at the trial, painting Bubi as a dangerous dissident. In addition to his
educational activities, Bubi wrote several works of religious scholarship, In the book ex¬
cerpted here, Bubi argues that the period of ijtihad (rational religious interpretation) did
not end in the early Islamic era, and that Muslims are not bound by the positions of the
great scholars of the distant past. Rather, he writes, Muslims must reclaim this right and
duty, which medieval obscurantists and despots have for centuries denied them. 1
Human thought has been advancing day by day, and
even the most ignorant and foolish are dazzled to see
the results of this progress. In such an era, it is fool¬
ish to say that “understanding the Qur’an is limited
to those who lived in the past; now they are extinct,
and no more of them will be born until the end of
time.” It is also foolish to waste precious time re¬
sponding to such claims. However, when do things
ever go the way you want them? I wish that the truth
had not been lost among illusions of all sorts. That
way such delusions would not be written in the name
of science, and therefore we would not feel it neces¬
sary to respond to such questions.
Who would have imagined that Islam—which
based itself on reason and thinking, and in every sen¬
tence addresses reason and thinking—would be de¬
prived of the freedom of ijtihad [rational religious in¬
terpretation] and would be left under the yoke of
taqlid [imitation of great scholars]? I wish this were
Abdullah Bubi, Zaman-i Ijtihad Munqariz mi, Dagil mi? (Is
the Period of Ijtihad Over or Not?) (Kazan, Tatarstan, Rus¬
sia: Millat Kutubkhanasi, 1909), pp. 2-13. Translation from
Tatar and introduction by Ahmet Kanlidere.
just imagination. That way such troubles would not
beset Muslims. Children think highly of the mistakes
their elders make, such us drinking alcohol. Like¬
wise, because of their misunderstanding of the aims
and conditions of Muslims in the past, [some of] our
recent Muslims adopt and imitate whatever actions—
even those that are destructive—that past Muslims
performed. Unfortunately, the problem was not lim¬
ited to this. The troublesome practice of taqlid spread
so widely that it shook the very structure of Islam
and caused Islam to deviate from its original path.
Under the lash of oppression, the light of Islam was
nearly extinguished. It is this taqlid that caused re¬
cent Islamic legal scholars to devote hundreds of
pages to menstruation, a topic not even mentioned
in the Qur'an, while failing to pay any attention to
morality, which makes up a very large part of the
Holy Book of the Muslims. I wish they had spent just
1. Ahmet Kanlidere, Reform within Islam: The Tajdid
and Jadid Movement among the Kazan Tatars ( 1809-1917 )
(Istanbul, Turkey: Eren Yaytncihk, 1997), pp. 142-143;
Azade-Ayje Rorlich, The Volga Tatars (Stanford, Calif.:
Hoover Institution Press, 19S6). pp. 75-76, 97-99.
232
IS THE PERIOD OF IJTIHAD OVER? 233
one tenth of their time considering the moral values
that the Qur'an orders, rather than indulging them¬
selves in matters of religious law. If they had done
that, perhaps Muslims would not be in their present
state of ignorance and misery. If recent Muslims al¬
lowed reason to reach the truth, as early Muslims did,
there would be no accusations of perdition and dis¬
belief, and no words of hate. Only Satan rebelled
against the compassion of God. Why do you accuse
your brother of blasphemy and heresy just because
he has a different opinion or has criticized the thought
of a Muslim from the past. Why do you tell him,
“You will not be able enter God’s paradise?” Com¬
panions of the Prophet [Muhammad, 570-632] and
the founders of the four Muslim orthodox schools
also differed in opinion on many matters. However,
they never accused each other of heresy and they did
not regard each other as foes. Thus, it is said that there
was less disagreement of opinion between [Abu
‘Abdullah Muhammad] ShafTi [767-820] and Abu
Hanifa [circa 699-767] than between [the two lead¬
ing followers of Abu Hanifa,] Abu Yusuf [Ya‘qub
al-Kufi, died 798] and Muhammad [al-Shaybani,
circa 750-805].
Since their disagreement represented freedom of
thought and speech, it was beneficial for the umma
[Muslim community]. However, the time came when
Muslims set aside their original sources and began
thoughtlessly to imitate the sayings of certain indi¬
viduals from the past. Each party bound itself to a
particular leader and stuck fanatically to this path,
although God criticized Jews and Christians [for
similar acts], saying, “They worship their rabbis
and their monks as gods, apart from God.” [Qur’an,
Sura 9, Verse 31] Each party became the foe of any
other that differed in opinion. None of the parties
desired to know the reasoning of the others. All of
the parties insulted one another, and spoke ill of one
another, and thought only about increasing the num¬
ber of their followers. Selfishness increased along
with quarrels and disputes. None of the parties sought
to find the truth, but instead sought only to best each
other and show that they alone were right. These
disputes, rather than benefitting Muslim society, sub¬
stantially weakened it. It was as though this saying
of God was addressed to them: “The people of the
Book did not differ until knowledge had been given
to them.” [Sura 3, Verse 19]
Everywhere [in the Qur’an], God invited people
to reason. Consequently, Islam bases itself upon in¬
dependent thinking. Taqlid and Islam are mutually
contradictory. If this principle of independent think¬
ing had continued and gained strength, right would
have been separated from wrong, and people would
have avoided taqlid. However, things did not hap¬
pen that way. The Qur’an criticized the people of the
book [Jews and Christians] for altering their [holy]
book and imitating the words of their religious elders
unreservedly, mixing what is right and what is wrong.
Likewise, our religious elders of later days blindly
imitated the sayings of their elders. They say: “The
statements of the founders of the madhhabs [the prin¬
ciple schools within Sunni Islam] must be obeyed.
Their words must be given precedence over the de¬
cisive words of the Qur’an and hadiths [sayings of
the Prophet].” On the other hand, when the words of
their religious elders contradict the words of the
founders of the four madhhabs, they follow the el¬
ders, saying: “In comparison with the words of the
Qur’an and hadith, as well as with the words of the
founders of the four madhabs, the words of these
religious elders provide more illuminating informa¬
tion for us. Therefore, the seeming contradiction in
their words results from a deficiency in our under¬
standing.” Thus, the followers of each party obeyed
the founders of the four madhhabs only in such mat¬
ters that their own religious elders declared appro¬
priate, and they chose the path of taqlid, though this
has been declared wrong unanimously. In doing so,
they made Islam narrow, even though the Qur’an
said: “God does not wish to impose any hardship on
you”; [Sura 5, Verse 6] “God wishes ease and not
hardship for you.” [Sura 2, Verse 185] With the cur¬
tain of taqlid, they closed the wide paths of ijtihad
and the solutions to many difficult matters which can
be found in God’s Book and His Prophet’s practice.
Since they do not use their minds, and they resist
every reasoned argument out of ignorance, it is im¬
possible to talk with them, too. Perhaps they should
just be sent to a lunatic asylum. The troubles that
Muslims have suffered because of them are much
greater than the benefits they brought. They were
useful only to oppressive rulers and sultans.
Oppressors always benefit from ignorance and try
to fish in muddy waters. Above all, they fear knowl¬
edge and learning. Nothing causes knowledge to dis¬
appear so well as taqlid. In order to pacify people and
oppress them, the first step is to abolish the idea of
freedom and ijtihad. For this reason, oppressors
welcome the fatwa [religious ruling] that says, “The
234 Abdullah Bubi
time for ijtihad is over,” by either coopting or threat¬
ening the scholars of their time.
Today the illness of taqlid has became so wide¬
spread and firmly rooted that a person who calls for
a return to the Qur’an and sunna [the practice of the
Prophet] will be hated, ostracized, and attacked with
curses. God—may He be exalted!—said, “Do you
claim that Ibrahim [Abraham], Isma’il [Ishmael],
Ishaq [Isaac], Ya'qub [Jacob], and their offspring
were Jews or Christians?’” [Sura 2, Verse 140] None
of the great prophets accepted the yoke of taqlid, they
only obeyed the truth which comes from proof.
Taqlid, following, and the repetition of everything
heard or read as though one were copying from a
book—all are bid'a [later innovations]. The Prophet
was sent precisely to end these distortions and to
return to the original scriptures. Followers who fol¬
low without reason were criticized with these words:
“When they face their punishment, those who were
followed will disown their followers.” [Sura 2, Verse
166] God criticized those who talk without evidence
or knowledge, calling them the followers of Satan:
“Do not walk in the footsteps of Satan, your acknowl¬
edged enemy. He will ask you to indulge in evil,
indecency, and to speak lies of God you cannot even
conceive.” [Sura 2, Verses 168-169] It is a very
strange thing that recent scholars turn away from the
Qur’an and hadith and cling to a madhhab, even
though a mountain of proof has been brought before
them. Because of their ignorance, they think that they
will protect the faith with taqlid. The protection of
religion will not be achieved by taqlid, by turning
away from the Qur’an and hadith, by intervening
between God and humankind, or by causing people’s
hearts to lose the love of God. Therefore, God said:
“When it is said to them, ‘Follow what God has re¬
vealed,’ they reply: ‘No, we will follow only what
our fathers practiced.’” [Sura 2, Verse 170] In order
to demonstrate the wickedness and wrongness of
taqlid, God also said in the same verse: “Even though
their fathers were senseless men lacking in guid¬
ance.” In saying this, God recognizes as beasts those
who do not understand what is said to them and who
do not ask for proof. If those who favor taqlid pos¬
sessed understanding hearts, just this verse would be
sufficient to demonstrate the wickedness of consid¬
ering old customs as holy, and the wrongness of turn¬
ing away from the Qur’an and hadith.
This verse tells us that all who favor the path of
taqlid are in the wrong, because in seeking the truth
they do not look for any proof from those they fol¬
low. Those who seek the truth would probably find
it in the end. If they fail once, on their second attempt
they would think it over and so have a better chance
of finding the truth. For this reason, mindful people
would not employ fake excuses and leave God’s
words and blindly follow a person, however brilliant.
They would see clearly that people may make a mis¬
take, no matter how good and mindful they are.
Therefore, it is necessary to check the proof before
following somebody, rather than just obeying. Do not
look at who said a thing, but look at what is said.
Thus, God said in the Qur’an: “Give glad tidings to
My creatures. Those who listen to then follow the
best it contains are the ones who have been guided
by God, and are men of wisdom.” [Sura 39, Verses
17-18] For this reason, in his book Munqidh min al-
dalal {The Deliverer from Error), Imam [Abu Hamid
Muhammad] al-Ghazzali [1058-1111] thanked God
for releasing him from taqlid, so that he would draw
beneficial ideas from each of the four madhhabs,
while making sure that their sources are authentic
(although those who favor taqlid called this “com¬
pilation”). That is, he was pleased that he rose from
the level of taqlid to the level of scrutiny. As is well
known, those who favor taqlid saw compilation as
inappropriate or haram [religiously prohibited]. But
is there any evidence that it is haram ? If anyone
claims that there is, he is welcome to prove it! They
have no evidence. These people resemble those
whom God described: “Among them are heathens
who know nothing of the Book, but only what they
wish to believe, and only lost in fantasies.” [Sura 2,
Verse 78]
The scholars of the people of the book changed
the scriptures, and with their various interpretations
they moved away from divine rules. They gave im¬
portance to their fancies and held these fancies above
the Scriptures. They grew proud of their predeces¬
sors from the Golden Age and thought that this was
sufficient for their happiness. Thus, their religion
moved away from its bases and became corrupted and
died. We read about these events now and smile at
them in astonishment. However, we are not aware
that we are following the same path they did. Also,
we are not aware that we deserve the saying of the
Prophet: “[Unfortunately,] you will obey your pre¬
decessors.” We never remember that these verses
show the wrongfulness of taqlid, and that the Mus¬
lims of the early period of Islam agreed upon this
IS THE PERIOD OF IJTIHAD OVER? 235
matter. Again, we do not remember that at that time,
the ignorant learned faith from the learned only after
checking their reasoning, and if there was no proof
they did not follow them blindly. Shari'a [religious
law] does not forbid those who have found their way
through reasoning to obey; however, if the reason¬
ing is unknown, how can we know who has used their
mind? For that reason, after criticizing those who
followed their ancestors without reasoning, God de¬
livered the following example: “The unbelievers are
like a person who shouts to one that cannot hear more
than a call and a cry. They are deaf, dumb, and blind,
they fail to understand.” [Qur’an, Sura 2, Verse 171]
That is, those who follow blindly resemble sheep.
Just as the sheep are led by the voice of the shepherd,
and do not understand this voice, nor their fortune
and misfortune, so those who accept a belief or reli¬
gious law without deduction cannot understand their
fortune or misfortune. This verse clearly shows that
imitating without reasoning is the business of unbe¬
lievers; according to this verse, those who do not
know their religion with proof but understand sim¬
ply through passive submission, cannot be consid¬
ered believers. The meaning of belief is not to tie
people to a certain madhhab as an animal is tied to
its halter, but to raise up their minds in science and
learning. Only then can people understand what is
good or bad and abstain from the wicked by know¬
ing its undesirable consequences. Only then will it
be possible to invite civilized nations to Islam. At the
present time, if we say to civilized nations: “Here is
our shari'a. It is codified by the religious scholars
of early Islam and nothing can be added to their
interpretations. You will not understand such mat¬
ters, because a long time has passed from the time of
understanding the Qur’an! For that reason, you have
to accept the words of the legal scholars, even though
their words contradict the Qur’an and hadith. You
should practice these [teachings] without consider¬
ing whether they suit the conditions of the era! You
must do exactly this. If you do otherwise, you will
deviate from Islam.” If we assert all of this, will they
have any love for Islam? Will they abandon their
intellect and follow what some old legal scholars
have said, therefore putting themselves in the posi¬
tion of an ignorant person? How can you convince
these people with [religious scholars such as
Shamsuddin] Quhistani [Hanafi scholar, died circa
1543] and Levleciyye [reference unclear]? They will
not follow the words of the old legal scholars, except
by using their minds. If we proceed while practicing
our religion in such a manner of submission, how can
we bring the civilized nations closer to us and to our
religion? On the contrary, God forbid, we would
cause our own learned people to sicken of Islam, and
thereby we would cut the ground out from under our
own feet.
In order to gather Muslims around Islam and to
raise our national glory, we need to inquire into
Islam and return it to its original condition, while per¬
mitting all to understand it with their own mind.
When this is done, Muslims will not be stagnant and
stuck to taqlid, nor will they be satisfied with vague
fancies and sanctify the old ideas. Rather, they will
understand the mysteries of the Qur’an and the bene¬
fits of the duties God presented, and the wisdom
behind the ordering of such duties. God praised those
thusly: “Those to whom We have sent down the
Book, and who read it as it should be read, believe
in it truly.” [Sura 2, Verse 121] Their belief will be
stronger, and they will be happy in this world as well
as in the next world. They will not slip into taqlid
and mix their belief with pernicious innovations and
customs for lack of understanding of their religion.
God criticized those as follows: “Those who deny it
will be losers.” [Sura 2, Verse 121] They will think
with their own minds but will not contradict the free¬
dom of thought by imposing their own ideas. They
intend to return to the Qur’an and the sunna. How¬
ever, they will base a forced interpretation of the
Qur’an and hadith on the words of the founders of
the four orthodox schools. Rather, they will accept
the words of the founders if they are in accordance
with these sources; otherwise they will reject them.
They will also follow the principle of the compan¬
ions of the Prophet, the generation that followed, and
the founders of the four orthodox schools, saying,
“Everyone is free in matters of ijtihad .” It is true that
in our time madhhabs and controversies have in¬
creased. However, among the inujtahids [religious
scholars] of the early period of Islam, there was no
fanaticism and such controversies did not cause the
Muslims to fight one another or to cut off friendly
relations with one another. People who had a great
enough ability to understand acted according to their
own interpretation in controversial issues. They did
not hate those who asked them to refer to the Qur’an
and sunna, nor did they accuse others of heresy. They
tried to understand each matter by expending as great
intellectual effort as they could. They also tried to
236 Abdullah Bubi
infer religious rules from the four basic sources of
Islam: the Qur’an, sunna , consensus, and the method
of analogy. They did not glorify old scholars while
demeaning later ones. And they did not claim that
later scholars could not reach the level of the older
ones, no matter what effort they expend. Contrary to
the claims that one has to have a deep knowledge of
Qur’anic exegesis and hadith and related sciences in
order to become a mujtahid, they knew that it would
be sufficient to know the Arabic sciences of text and
style as well as the aims of the shari'a as [Ibrahim
ibn Musa] Shatibi [Andalusian scholar, died 1388]
wrote in his Muwafaqat [The Agreements], For that
reason, Shatibi claimed that it is all right for a
mujtahid to follow a non-mujtahid in determining the
authenticity of a hadith which is fundamental for
making ijtihad. Abu Hanifa, who was unanimously
accepted as a mujtahid, was only able to know a quite
small number of hadith, because the place where he
lived had a limited degree of hadith narration.
Since God’s creation is progressing day by day,
therefore the latest religion, Islam, is the most perfect
religion of all the religions. Similarly, it is quite pos¬
sible and in accordance with God’s sunna that in our
time there might be scholars of the same degree as, or
better than, the scholars of the past. For this reason,
the Prophet forbade people to substitute others for God
and His Prophet, saying: “Any innovations other than
our way belong to those who invented them and are
rejected,” while the founders of the four orthodox
schools forbade others to imitate them.
Abu Hanifa [founder of the Hanafi madhhab ] and
his companions said, “It is inappropriate to obey a
fatwa without knowing its underlying basis.” Again,
Abu Hanifa said, “If my word contradicts the Qur’an
and sunna, you should abandon it!” Thus he made
his meaning clear beyond any doubt or hesitance.
Malik ibn Anas [710-796, founder of the Maliki
madhhab] said, “Since I am a human being, I am
fallible. For this reason, you should think about my
opinion! If it is in accordance with the Qur’an and
sunna, you may follow it. If not, you should set it
aside!” Again, Malik ibn Anas once said, while point¬
ing out the grave of the Prophet: “Only the owner of
this tomb is not to be rejected. All others might be
rejected. In addition, Imam Shafi’i [founder of the
Shafi’i madhhab] said, “It is not appropriate to obey
any person but the Messenger,” while Imam Ahmad
[ibn Hanbal, 780-855, founder of the Hanbali
madhhab] said: “Follow nobody in your religion!
Follow only our Prophet and things narrated by his
companions!” Elsewhere, Imam Ahmad clearly ex¬
plained: “Do not follow me, or Shafi’i, Malik, [Abu
‘Amr ‘Abd al-Rahman] Awza’i [died 774], or
[Sufyan al-]Thawri [716-778], but make use of the
sources from which they derive their teaching!”
As is evident, all of the founders of the four or¬
thodox schools of Islam agreed upon the wrongness
of imitation. They engaged in ijtihad and expressed
their opinions, but they did not impose upon anybody
else by asserting that their opinions had to be ac¬
cepted. Everyone was free to accept or not accept.
Abu Hanifa said, “This is my opinion. If anyone
brings a better explanation, I will accept that one.”
In the same way, when Imam Malik was asked to
compel the agents of Hamn al-Rashid [caliph, circa
763-809] to act according to the principles put forth
in his work al-Muwatta’ [The Well-Trodden Path],
he declined, saying: “The Prophet’s companions
spread all over different countries, and there are
hadiths in every nation that other nations have not
heard of.” Imam Shafi’i used to forbid his students
to follow his words in the presence of hadith, say¬
ing, “If the Prophet’s words become evident to a
person, it is not correct to leave aside the sunna in
favor of anybody’s word.” In the same way. Imam
Ahmad rejected the writing down and codifying of
the religious rulings he gave. They knew that they
might have fallen into error in some of their judg¬
ments and stated this clearly. They never introduced
their rulings by saying, “Here, this judgment is the
judgment of God and His prophet.” If Abu Hanifa’s
judgment had been accepted without question, no¬
body—not Shafi’i, Imam Muhammad, Imam Abu
Yusuf, or anybody else—would have gone against
him. If, as later scholars supposed, respect for a
teacher meant to follow all of his words or to act
without thinking, even though this word might con¬
tradict the sacred sources, Imam Muhammad and
Imam Abu Yusuf would have been the first to fol¬
low their teachers.
You imitators! You go too far in respecting your
teachers, saying, “He is good and could not be mis¬
taken.” Thus you follow even the most ignorant and
foolish person and fail to remember that nobody
except the prophets is free from making mistakes.
Your case resembles that of people who try to find
their way by looking at the stars in the sky, even
though Mecca is directly in front of them. Although
religious proofs are clearly visible to you. you turn
IS THE PERIOD OF IJTIHAD OVER? 237
away and follow the words of a legal scholar! You
have seen with your own eyes the words of the legal
scholars, whose scholarly books you believe in count
reason fundamental for science. You deny that rea¬
son is fundamental in the matter of understanding
religious proofs! Therefore, you yourself fail to fol¬
low these books and these [supposedly] infallible
men. You yourself say that it is necessary to follow
these leaders, but you go against their consensus, that
it is not proper to follow anybody! You yourself
claim that it is not proper to step outside of the four
orthodox schools, but again you keep saying that up
to the the end of the fifth century [a.h., or twelfth
century a.d., that is, several centuries after the found¬
ing of the orthdox schools], ijtihad continued! It is
quite obvious that even at the end of the fifth cen¬
tury there were many scholars practicing ijtihad.
[...] A mufti [religious leader] has to be a legal
scholar. Without a doubt, he must also be a mujtahid.
Even the Shafi'i school contended that even judges
should be mujtahids. The Hanafi school contended
that it is appropriate to appoint a person other than a
mujtahid as a judge only on condition that he be
under a mufti capable of ijtihad. Hidaya [Guidance,
by Burhanuddin Marghinani, died circa 1197] laid
down the condition that a judge should be capable
of making ijtihad. [Binaya fi] sharh al-Hidaya
[Structure of Explanation of “Guidance”, by Badr
al-Din ‘Ayni 1361-1451], Mukhtasar al-Wiqaya
[Abridged “Defenses”, by ‘Ubaydallah Mahbubi,
died circa 1346], and Multaqa al-abhur [Confluence
of the Seas, by Ibrahim Halabi, died circa 1549] ac¬
cepted ijtihad only as a preferred condition, while
Fath al-qadir [The Powerful Victory, by Muhammad
Ibn al-Humam, circa 1388-1459] stated clearly that
“it is not proper to follow a person incapable of
ijtihad, according to the schools of Shafi'i, Malik,
Ahmad, as well as our scholar, Muhammad [al-
Shaybani, a founder of the Hanafi school, circa 750-
805].” And finally, Majma‘ al-anhur [Confluence of
Streams, by 1 Abd al-Rahman Shaykhzada, died circa
1667] quoted Fath [al-qadir]: “According to the
methodology of legal scholarship, a mufti should be
capable of engaging in ijtihad .” That means that,
although there is controversy about appointing a
person incapable of ijtihad as judge, it is unaccept¬
able to appoint a person who is incapable of ijtihad
as mufti. This shows that appointing muftis and
judges never became extinct. Therefore, the time for
ijtihad must never have become extinct.
33
Rizaeddin bin Fakhreddin
I bn Taymiyya
Rizaeddin bin Fakhreddin (Tatarstan, 1858-1936) was a leading figure of the Tatar re¬
naissance. Bom in a village in Samara, Fakhreddin did not study in Bukhara, as other lead¬
ing religious scholars of the era did. Instead, he pursued his studies within Tatarstan,
becoming a member of the Muslim Religious Board, the Sobranie, in his early 30s. He
turned to journalism in 1906, publishing the longest-lived Tatar journal of the era, Shura
(Council). Fakhreddin then returned to clerical activities in 1921, serving as mufti (reli¬
gious leader) of the European region of Russia until his death in 1936—though never
praising the Soviet regime that allowed him to hold this position. Fakhreddin was a pro¬
lific author, Using the archives of the Muslim Religious Board, he wrote a two-volume
history of Tatar scholars that remains the best source on the subject. He also wrote tracts
on the condition of the Muslims of Russia; pedagogical works on students, women, men,
and family; and biographies of numerous famous figures, including the modernist Sayyid
Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (chapter I I) and various medieval scholars. The present selec¬
tion, the conclusion to Fakhreddin's biography of Ibn Taymiyya (1263-1328), links medi¬
eval religious reform with contemporary modernist goals. According to Fakhreddin, the
rise and decline of nations are closely connected with the strength of their belief sys¬
tems. The renaissance of the Muslim world, he argues, requires the removal of supersti¬
tions that have corrupted Muslim belief, and a return to the beliefs of the early Muslims. 1
Progress and regress, the strengthening and the de¬
cline of religious communities [«mmas], are based
on the beliefs on which they establish themselves.
Belief is the axis of all revolutions and the political,
economic, scientific, and literary struggles that take
place in the world. Likewise, belief is the source of
every kind of discovery and invention, religious as
well as scientific renewal and reform. The problems,
disputes, alliances and disagreements among man¬
kind, and all their accompanying difficulties and
troubles, come from belief.
When their belief serves as a guide, the most mis¬
erable nations climb upward; however, when their
beliefs are coerced, the most powerful religious com¬
munities fall to the bottom in a confused and scat¬
tered state. They leave behind only their names—on
documents and manuscripts, on buildings and in
books, written in small or great numbers.
For this reason, if a nation makes progress, one
should look at its belief. However, if a nation displays
signs of regression, it is urgent to study its belief, and
the necessary precautions should be taken accordingly.
The same thing can be said for human beings. A per¬
son who says, “God created me unlucky, I am unfor¬
tunate,” falls into desperation and becomes unsuccess¬
ful in life. However, a person who has a strong belief
and says, “If this thing is within the power of human
beings, why can’t I do it?”—this person will be suc¬
cessful. For this reason, if we wish the advancement
of a nation, first we have to correct its belief system.
Under the motivation of Islamic belief, Arabs,
who had previously fought unending battles among
Rizaeddin bin Fakhreddin, Ibn Taymiyya (Ibn Taymiyya )
(Orenburg, Russia: Vaqt Matba'as'i, 1911), pp. 128-139.
Translation from Tatar and introduction by Ahmet Kanlidere.
1. Ahmet Kanlidere, Reform within Islam: The Tajdid
and Jadid Movement among the Kazan Tatars (1809-
1917) (Istanbul, Turkey: Eren Yaymcilik, 1997), pp. 50-52;
Azade-Ayje Rorlich, The Volga Tatars (Stanford, Calif.:
Hoover Institution Press, 1986), pp. 53-58; Mahmud Tahir,
“Rizaeddin Fahreddin,” Central Asian Survey, 1989, vol¬
ume 8, number 1, pp. 111-115; Ismail Tiirkoglu, Rusya
Tiirkleri Arasmdaki Yenilegme Hareketinin Onciilerinden
Rizaeddin Fahreddin (1858-1936) (Rizaeddin Fakhreddin
(1858-1936), A Pioneer of the Renewal Movement of the
Turks of Russia) (Istanbul, Turkey: Otiiken, 2000); Omer
Hakan Ozalp, Rizaeddin bin Fahreddin (Istanbul, Turkey:
Dergah Yayinlan, 2001).
238
IBN TAYMIYYA 239
themselves, gained a new life. They established a
brotherhood among themselves and attained a uni¬
fying consensus. Holding a sword in one hand and
the Qur’an in the other, they went out from the wil¬
derness and expanded into a vast range of lands.
While some were conquering countries and cities,
still others occupied themselves with trade. They
became the successors of [Julius] Caesar [Roman
emperor, died 44 b.c.] and left their footprints
throughout the world. Places dominated by the fam¬
ily of Mundhir [the Lakhmids], the Himyarids, and
the Ghassanids [dynasties based in present-day Iraq,
Yemen, and Syria] became the cradle of Islam. The
science of the Muslims became known everywhere,
and the earth’s surface grew prosperous with the
works of Islam. At a time when transportation was
difficult, Muslim caravans traveled from south to
north and from west to east. Great bazaars filled up
with the goods of Muslim merchants, and the Mus¬
lim trade network reached to the shores of Andalusia.
It was considered most unacceptable for a Muslim
to remain idle, to envy and covet another person’s
property. As if in a busy factory, the entire Muslim
world was involved in similarly intense activities.
What was the reason for this extraordinary pat¬
tern of innovation and wondrous activity? There is
no need to ask; the reason was the change in their
belief. Numerous verses of the Qur’an and hadith
[sayings of the Prophet] changed the belief of these
immoral Arabs and led them to a true path. Accord¬
ing to the noble Qur’an: “He made for you all that
the earth contains”; [Sura 2, Verse 29] “And we
taught him [David] the art of making coats of mail”;
[Sura 21, Verse 80] “Do not forget your part in this
world”; [Sura 28, Verse 77] “And that each man shall
receive only what he strives for”; [Sura 53, Verse 39]
“And when the prayers are over, spread out in the
land, and look for the bounty of God”; [Sura 62,
Verse 10] “It is God who has subdued the ocean for
you, so that ships may sail upon it by His command,
and you may seek His bounty, and may render thanks
happily. He subjugated for you whatever the heavens
and earth contain, each and every thing. Verily there
are signs in this for those who reflect”; [Sura 45,
Verses 12-13] “It is He who made the earth subser¬
vient to you, that you may travel all around it, and
eat of the things He has provided; and to Him will
be your Resurrection.” [Sura 67, Verse 15] Accord¬
ing to hadith: “There is no better food for a man
than food he has earned by his own labor. Even the
prophet David ate food which he had grown with his
own hands”; “It is better for a man to make a living
at hard work than to beg from another, whether that
one gives or not”; “If a Muslim plants a tree or grows
grain, and someone, or a bird or wild animal, eats
from it, this is counted as charity for the Muslim.” 2
If this righteous belief had remained in existence
among Muslims, civilization in its real meaning
would have appeared in the Muslim world. Schools,
teachers and students in these schools, scholars and
artisans, inventors, factories, architects, engineers,
doctors and professors—all those people the Euro¬
peans have today, would have come from the Mus¬
lim world. Unfortunately, the later Muslims did not
follow the path of the earlier Muslims. They lent their
ears to those merchants of religion who forbade, in
the name of religion, the trades and businesses that
were necessary for the happiness and prosperity of
humankind. In addition, whether it was adopted from
Christianity or invented by coincidence, some people
were given titles of sainthood, though the Prophet
had said nothing about this. The common people
surrendered themselves to such persons, contrary to
the clear prohibition: “Do not follow that of which you
have no knowledge.” [Qur’an, Sura 17, Verse 36]
These persons were believed to be “master of two
worlds” [heaven and earth], “the best of all creation,”
and “the pole of the universe,” and people began to
submit their wishes to these saints, requesting help
from their spirits in humble supplication.
As a result of such belief, like a factory standing
idle, the Muslim world remained completely idle and
vacant. Attention was not paid to the factory of the
world that God described in the verse: “And you will
find no change in the law of God.” [Qur’an, Sura 48,
Verse 23]
It is futile to resist machines and to struggle
against nature, and it will not bring any benefit, only
damage, since it is not easy to hold rivers by obstruct¬
ing and damming them.
While the Muslim world remained idle and super¬
stitions replaced divine belief, enemies seized the
opportunity and attacked Islam from all sides. The
beautiful countries and riches that the Muslims had
inherited fell into the hands of their enemies. They
lost their spirit, too. They should have learned from
these misfortunes and drawn moral lessons from such
2. [Muhammad ibn Isma‘il] Bukhari [810-870], [Collec¬
tion of Authentic Hadiths ,] volume 3, pp. 9, and 66.
240 Rizaeddin bin Fakhreddin
conditions. However, their spirit could not awake, as
its illnesses had become ingrained. Rather, in keep¬
ing with the saying, “Heal me with that which is itself
a sickness,” their condition worsened. They drank, one
after another, the wine of somnolence, and even asked
for more. They were surprised when they heard the
sound of the Europeans' cannons and weapons, but
this did not awaken them. On the contrary, after stay¬
ing inactive for some time, this led them to the tombs
of their ancestors, spirits, and religious leaders, who
are (to use the term of a contemporary writer) “living
idols.” Rather than seeking help from God alone, and
acting in accordance with the teachings of the Qur’an,
they sought help from dead people. The fate of those
who do not walk the proper path is deprivation and
misery. That was the result in this case.
Our statements apply to the general tendency of
people. However, ever since the Age of Prosperity
[the era of the Prophet], a small group of people
adopted the principle of speaking only the truth, fear¬
ing nobody. They did not approve of popular prac¬
tices. But power was in the hand of others, and for
this reason their voice was not heard. They could not
express themselves adequately. Since the death of the
caliph ‘Ali [ibn Abi Talib, 656-661], public opinion
was on the common people’s side and the people of
Pi$en Pazari prevailed everywhere. 3 Those who
study the historical facts will know that the opinion
of the people overwhelms the truth. As a result, the
most famous personalities of Islam were accused of
being infidels and heretics.
If some undeserving people are given the title of
saint, the limits of the ensuing misfortune are diffi¬
cult to estimate. To see this, one should study [the
history of] the Christian world. From the same causes
came the same consequences. This is a known fact;
there is no doubt in that. For this reason, the Muslim
world fell into the condition that the Christian world
experienced in the medieval age. The names of saints
became sources of sustenance. The names of Mus¬
lim saints became means of earning a living. Their
tombs and the surrounding areas filled with miracle
sellers and peddlers of saintly intercession. Although
it went by a different name, a class of clerics formed
with a similar function. The names of great saints
became the tools of trade.
3. [Pigen Pazari was a Muslim market in Kazan known
as the bastion of Tatar conservatism.—Trans.]
It was necessary to show the greatness of saints
in order to earn more money. For this purpose,
strange powers and marvelous occurrences were
shown as proof. In the end, tens or hundreds of lies
were added to a true fact, along with the invention
of numerous miracles and marvelous events. Even
though it was not stated openly, by implication saints
were given the function of “the One who created all
beings and gave food to all creation” [that is, God],
When the Muslim forces gained a small victory over
their enemies, these men attributed this to the help
of saints, and imposed this upon people in place of
faith. When a defeat occurred, they attributed this to
a failure to obtain the approval of saints (that is, too
little money had been donated), and they threatened
the ignorant people.
In order to gain fame and earn more worldly profit,
as much exaggeration as possible is needed. Therefore,
some make their own shaykhs [holy men] the friend
of Khizr Ilyas [a mythical prophet]. 4 Some go even
further and make him an intimate friend of the Prophet,
exploiting this alleged friendship for their own ben¬
efit. Others have their spiritual guides conquer cities
and defeat their enemies, who they make flee in dis¬
order (just as in the siege of Vienna [in 1683], the
Christian clergy attributed the Turks’ failure to the help
of saints). Still some others make those (who deny their
shaykhs) live in misery, while some lengthen their life
through the power of a saint. 5 The books of miracles
are full of such adventures and stories.
Those men to whom the title of “helper of crea¬
tures” was given, whose names were exploited for
profit, will not be blamed. They would not have ap¬
proved of such lies and the extravagant praise and
miracles attributed to them. The real blame should
go to those who prey upon the people and consume
their property by such means.
Some people accepted Jesus, peace be upon him,
as God, and others attributed supernatural peculiari¬
ties to ‘Ali and his sons. There is no doubt that these
honorable figures would not consent to such claims.
And they would not excuse those who do this out of
excessive feelings of love. Likewise, those leading
figures of the Muslim community, such as [‘Abd al-
4. [The author writes Khizr and Ilyas separately, as if re¬
ferring to two separate personalities.—Trans.]
5. [‘Abd al-Rahman Jabarti, Egyptian historian, circa
1753-1825], ‘Aja'ib al-athar [Marvelous Works], volume 1.
p. 147.
IBN TAYMIYYA 24 I
Qadir] Jilani [1077-1166, founder of the Qadiriyya
Sufi order], Ibrahim ibn Adham [730-777, Central
Asian ascetic], Habib [al-]‘Ajami [died circa 747, a
famous Sufi from Basra], [Muhyi al-Din] Ibn ‘Arabi
[1165-1240, Andalusian mystic] and [Baha'uddin]
Naqshband [1317-1389, founder of the Naqshbandi
Sufi order], [Ibrahim ibn 'Abd al-‘Aziz al-]Dasuqi
[circa 1235-1277, founder of Dasuqiyya Sufi order]
and [Ahmad al-]Badawi [1200-1276, founder of the
Ahmadiyya Sufi order], [Ahmad al-]Rifa‘i [circa
1106-1182, founder of the Rifa'iyya Sufi order] and
[Ahmad] Yasawi [died 1166, Central Asian mystic],
and others would not be pleased with those who seek
help from them by bowing and prostrating before
their tombs. Just as those who claim Jesus to be God
should not be considered his followers, those who
attribute superhuman peculiarities to ‘Ali and his
sons, and those writers who write exaggerated things
about them, should not be counted as [tme] follow¬
ers of ‘Ali. Acts of respect that contradict the spirit
of the Qur’an and sunna [the practice of the Prophet]
cannot be considered proper. People’s pleasures and
conscience cannot be taken as proof [in religion], and
their traditions and customs cannot be considered
guiding principles. On the matter of respect, our proof
is the proof of the Qur’an and sunna. True reason
does not contradict this.
As a result of all these [mistaken] beliefs, Muslims
who had been advancing rapidly on the path of
progress stagnated. Schools fell into ruins, men of
learning lost the respect and worth they used to pos¬
sess. Any lazy creature could be called a religious
leader, and any insane person could be appointed as
religious scholar. The Muslim world was ruined and
became filled with wretched mendicants. India, with
its treasuries of gold, and Turkistan, the spring of
learning, became victims of such beliefs. Likewise,
Marrakech, Andalusia, Egypt, and the Turkmen were
ruined by such thought. No trace remained of the
learning and scholars of the first generation of Mus¬
lims. Hypocrisy, mischief, eulogy, and superficial
observance replaced serious piety and sincerity. Very
bright, trusting young men, holding a rod and rosary
in their hands, belonging to a religious order, became
minor clergymen, traveling from house to house,
loitering and wasting Muslims’ property. Unquali¬
fied individuals attained the post of scholar and be¬
came tools of oppression, interpreting religion ac¬
cording to the wishes of oppressors and tyrants. No
trace of self-respect or love of nation was left. A time
came when the names of the companions of the
Prophet, great scholars, and the early Muslims were
exploited for worldly gain and human desires. As a
result, the Muslims were overwhelmed in economic
and political affairs, and so were destined to be
crushed under the feet of others. They sank into the
depths of hopelessness, disappointment, degradation,
and insult. “We belong to God, and to Him we shall
return.” [Qur’an, Sura 2, Verse 156] “Theoppressors
will now come to know through what reversals they
will be overthrown.” [Qur’an, Sura 26, Verse 227]
So, when did these [mistaken] beliefs spread among
the Muslims, such as the power of the spirits and the
dead, and the shaykhs' being “masters of the two
worlds,” and resurrection from death, and so on? And
through whom were such beliefs introduced? We
have no evidence that such beliefs existed in the Age
of Prosperity, and among the early Muslims. The
Honor of the Universe, our Prophet himself, worked
to dig trenches, wore armor, did housework, and
sewed his own clothes. His successors lived in the
same way. They toiled and took up the burden of
conquering the Arab tribes, as well as the lands of
Khosrow [king of Iran, reigned 531-579] and Cae¬
sar. During this time many events occurred that turn
a youth’s hair gray. However, none of them laid their
responsibilities on the backs of the people or took
themselves to the tombs [of holy men] to ask for help
from the dead. Some cruel men threw stones over the
Ka‘ba at Mecca, and others stole the sacred black
stone [of the Ka‘ba]. Still other unfortunates entered
the city of the Prophet [Medina], insulted the Mus¬
lims there, and behaved disrespectfully at the Holy
Garden [the tomb of the Prophet]. At such a time, no
spirit gave any help, and the dead did not use their
spiritual power. Nor did the [dead] shaykhs of
Turkistan or the teachers of Bukhara or the descen¬
dants of the Prophet in the Maghrib wield any
power—we do not even know whether they them¬
selves were saved when they passed away from this
world. According to God’s shari‘a [religious law],
is it possible to believe in the power of the dead?
Not only men but also women performed great
duties in the Age of Prosperity. Since they were
knowledgeable, knowledgeable of a cause, they did
not remain helpless and weak like those who are
sickly and lowly. They endured every difficulty by
saying, “It is better to die with honor than to live
242 Rizaeddin bin Fakhreddin
debased.” During time of war they assisted and
treated the wounded. Indeed, they performed the job
of those in the army who [today] give medical treat¬
ment. These things happened before the eyes of the
Prophet. In the battles of Qadisiyya and Yarmuk
[years 636 and 637], they fought in the same ranks
with men, and even went ahead of them. They did
not stay behind passively believing in the spirit of
the Prophet and his companions. It is recorded in the
history of Islam that in the Maysan war [633-636],
Muslim women brought about the victory over the
enemy. These were the Muslim women that Euro¬
pean writers described: “These women are no less
than their men in fighting. If they fall into captivity
they are capable of protecting themselves from any
harassment.” It was the sons of these women who
made the Europeans tremble.
As if there were not enough charity cases occupying
the streets, sitting and filling the best places, plac¬
ing a heavy burden on the umma, new things called
“the fountain of holy men” and “the mountain of the
saints” 6 are constantly being invented in many places
just to waste people’s property for the sake of a reli¬
gious order. Their purpose in this is well known.
Now, just look at the forbears, and then look at the
successors! The difference between them is so great
that it is difficult to see any connection between the
two. Now, instead of lions sit monkeys, while the
seats of real scholars are occupied only by robes.
Those whose foresight is not blinded would see and
know this, and their conscience would not deny it.
If Muslims desire a happy life and a secure future, if
passing their lives by serving others like slaves, car¬
rying brooms and axes along the streets looking for
jobs, are not their ultimate aspirations—then they
should try to understand Islam in the same way the
early Muslims understood it, and they should revive
themselves. Rather than constructing mausoleums,
they should build schools; rather than handing out
money to those who beg around sacred sites, they
should spend their money on education; rather than
6. [The mountain of the saints, Khojalar Tavi, was a sa¬
cred location in the Volga-Ural region of Russia. See the po¬
lemic against pilgrimages to the site by ‘A. ‘A. Rashidi,
Khojalar Tavi ya ki Yalgan Hajj [The Mountain of the Saints,
or a Fake Pilgrimage ] (Kazan, Tatarstan, Russia: Ornak
Matbaasi, 1909).—Trans.]
wasting their money on fountains for the holy and
the tombs of saints, they should help educate stu¬
dents, establish poorhouses, and build hospitals to
provide services for Muslims in need. It is undoubt¬
edly a crime against religion and an [irresponsible]
exaggeration to call mere worldly affairs “religion,”
and to vulgarize the name of religion for those things
that the Prophet did not deliver. “Tell them: ‘O
people of the Book, do not overstep the bounds of
truth in your beliefs.’” [Qur’an, Sura 5, Verse 77]
[Muhammad said:] “Do not go beyond the limits of
your religion; those who transgressed fell into ruin
by exceeding the bounds of their religion.”
It became a custom to repeat everything written in
hagiographies of praiseworthy figures. Isnads [chains
of authority, that is, the books’ sources] are not re¬
ally examined. No attention is paid to reason or the
rules of logic. 7 However, in a biography every piece
of information and fact is examined meticulously,
and partisanship is avoided as much as possible.
Since the work we have written [a biography of Ibn
Taymiyya] is not a hagiography, but a biography, we
examined major works in our library for positive and
negative accounts of Ibn Taymiyya, and then pro¬
duced this work. Then we gave it as a gift to honor¬
able personages, who must endure the torments of
those who pass their time insulting the likes of Ibn
Taymiyya, a man who spent his life in the service of
religion and community. The best consolation for
those who suffer is to see others suffer like them. If
we had the power we would sacrifice our world for
them, but we have only our books and pens.
Since we do not consider anybody infallible but
prophets, it is inappropriate to claim anybody’s word
or thinking to be completely true. Despite depth in
learning and skill in reasoning, anybody can make
mistakes. But those mistakes which are the result of
free reasoning would be more valuable than those
actions that habit deems correct; for that reason, it is
not a wise man's business to fight against every mis¬
take he sees. Right words should be accepted no
matter who utters them, and wrong words should be
7. When Muhammad ‘Abduh [reformist Egyptian scholar.
1849-1905; see chapter 3] was imprisoned, this was attrib¬
uted to the miracles of Shaykh [Muhammad] ‘Illaysh [con¬
servative Egyptian scholar and Sufi leader, 1802-1882].
However, when Shaykh ‘Illaysh was imprisoned, this was not
attributed to Muhammad ‘Abduh.
IBN TAYMIYYA 243
rejected regardless of who said them. “Take that
which is pure and leave that which is impure." [Ara¬
bic saying]
Our service in writing this work consisted of gath¬
ering and evaluating knowledge and insight that had
been written in various places. If necessary, readers
should judge every matter according to their own
reasoning, and in problematic matters they should act
in accordance with the advice: “Should you disagree
about something, refer it to God and the Messenger.”
[Qur’an, Sura 4, Verse 59] By doing this they will
obtain the consent of the Prophet, peace be upon him.
The most peculiar aspirations of the men of learning
and respect must be to seek the truth and to kneel in
the presence of the truth. “Let us not go astray, O
Lord, having guided us already. Bestow on us your
blessings, for You are the benevolent.” [Qur’an, Sura
3, Verse 8]
34
Abdurrauf Fitrat
Debate between a Teacher from
Bukhara and a European
Abdurrauf Fitrat (Bukhara, 1886-1938) was the most prominent modernist figure in
Russian Central Asia, The son of a prosperous merchant, Fitrat received a traditional Is¬
lamic education in Bukhara before being sent to Istanbul by a Bukharan benevolent so¬
ciety in 1909. The four hectic years Fitrat spent in Istanbul were formative of his worldview,
He returned to Bukhara in 1914 and became involved in cultural and educational activi¬
ties. In 1917, when the Russian revolution opened up possibilities for political action, Fitrat
emerged as one of the main leaders of the Young Bukharans, as the reformist intellectu¬
als began to style themselves. When the Bukharan People's Soviet Republic was pro¬
claimed in 1920, Fitrat served as the chief economic advisor and minister of education.
Frtrat's political stance of Bukharan nationalism proved unpalatable to the Soviet regime
in Moscow, and he was ousted from public office in 1923. He spent the rest of his life as
a scholar of the Turkic cultural heritage of Central Asia, publishing numerous works on
the language, literature, and music of Central Asia. Fitrat was arrested in 1937 during the
Great Purge and executed the following year. The Debate between a Teacher from Bukhara
and a European (published in Istanbul in Persian, 1911), excerpted here, was the most
popular work of Muslim reformism in Central Asia before 1917, for the new-method
schools defended by Fitrat here lay at the center of the reformist agenda in Central Asia, 1
European: Mr. Teacher! Some years ago Bukhara had
an independent, powerful government and a popu¬
lation of ten million people. After the defeat [in 1868]
of Amir Muzaffar [ruler of Bukhara, 1860-1885], the
pomp of kingship was replaced by an emirate; the
magnificence of independence turned into the state
of a protectorate; the population was reduced to one
third, and the land reduced to one tenth. From those
days until these, foreign intervention, with the help
of your own negligence [literally, the negligence of
you sleepers on the deserts of ignorance], has brought
the emirate to such a state of exhaustion that it re¬
sembles a formless statue. If you continue much
longer in your old neglect; if you do not have pity
on your religion and people; if you do not begin to
think about saving your nobility and honor; if you
forget the rights of your motherland, and if you be¬
tray the dignity and greatness of your world-conquer¬
ing ancestor [Amir] Timur [reigned 1370-1405], you
will cast this statue from the compass of memory, and
you will sleep forever in the land of dishonor, lowli¬
ness, and anonymity.
teacher: My brother, you frighten me. My soul
is about to leave my body. For God’s sake tell me
what the cure is! What is the remedy for this incur¬
able disease? Where shall we turn? What shall we do?
[Abdurrauf] Fitrat Bukharayi. Munazara[-yi] Mudarris-i
Bukharayi ba yak Nafar Farangi dar Hindustan dar barah-yi
Makatib-i Jadida (Debate between a Teacher from Bukhara
and a European in India about New Schools ) (Istanbul, Otto¬
man Empire: Matba‘a-i Islamiyya-i Hikmat, 1911-1912),
pp. 30-53. Translation from Persian by William L. Hanaway.
Introduction by Adeeb Khalid.
1. Hisao Komatsu, Kakumei no Chub Ajia: aru Jadiido
no shozo (Revolutionary Central Asia: Portrait of a Jadid)
(Tokyo, Japan: Tokyo University Press, 1996); Stephane A.
Dudoignon, “La question scolaire a Boukhara et au
Turkestan russe” (The Education Question in Bukhara and
Russian Turkistan), Cahiers du monde russe (Annals of the
Russian World), volume 37, 1996, pp. 133-210; Adeeb
Khalid. The Politics of Muslim Cultural Reform: Jadidism
in Central Asia (Berkeley: University of California Press,
1998); Edward A. Allworth. The Preoccupations of 'Abdal-
rauf Fitrat, Bukharan Nonconformist: An Analysis and List
of His Writings (Berlin, Germany: Das Arabische Buch,
2000 ).
244
DEBATE BETWEEN A TEACHER AND A EUROPEAN
245
What distress must we suffer to smell the scent of
liberation from this misery?
European: Be patient and I will tell you.
teacher: I have no patience left. Tell me!
European: Even if you did not want to know, I
would have told you. Now that you are impatient, I
shall certainly tell you.
teacher: Tell me at once!
European: I’ll tell you, but...
teacher: For God’s sake don’t abandon us. Ex¬
plain to us.
European: Mr. Teacher, I shall certainly tell you,
but I am afraid that you won’t accept it.
teacher: I say, if you tell us the remedy for our
incurable disease, why should we not accept it?
European: The remedy is this: you should open
new schools. Instead of the nonsense of studying ob¬
scure points of Arabic grammar, you should study the
new sciences, which produce rapid results and great
benefits. Bring teachers from Istanbul, which is the
capital of your Prophet’s caliph [that is, the Ottoman
sultan] and is famous for the abundance of its learn¬
ing and the prevalence of its new industries. Try to
have what the Christians possessed to make them vic¬
torious over you.
teacher: Fine, fine. Now I understand what you
are driving at. Now I see that all of your worries over
Islam were false. I am certain now that all of your
professions of friendship for Bukhara had no basis.
You only wanted to deceive us. You poor fool, don’t
you know that your opportunity for misleading us has
passed? Long ago we unmasked your friends who
wanted to lead us astray.
European: What are you saying? What have I said
to be worthy of such reproaches? Why do you react
so coldly merely on hearing the expression “new
schools”? Tell me, what have you seen of new
schools? What have you heard about these useful
sciences, so that if what I have said is bad, I can re¬
pent and apologize?
teacher: Poor fellow, you are afraid of me. One
of these new schools that you are talking about was
opened in Bukhara. It continued for a year, but our
great ‘ulama’ [religious scholars] understood the
truth of the matter, had no time for it, and closed it.
European: (Greatly amazed) Teacher, explain this
more clearly. Do you mean that a new school was
opened in Bukhara and the ‘ulama ’ would not allow
it [to continue]?
teacher: Yes, yes. Our ‘ulama ’, our pious, law¬
supporting ‘ulama ’, after they learned the truth of it,
closed the school.
European: I beg of you, tell me what the truth of
this school is, that your ‘ulama’ should forbid such
a useful thing once they understood it.
teacher: You ignoramus, you still keep on say¬
ing “useful school.” Do you think that I am still
fooled by you? Listen: in only a few years that school
would have made infidels out of our children.
European: You have made a claim with no proof.
teacher: What do you mean with no proof? I have
a thousand proofs.
European: Excellent. First tell me how you knew
that this school would have made infidels out of your
children.
teacher: You have not seen and do not know the
‘ulama’ of Bukhara. They are great men. Each one
of them teaches a thousand persons. Their horses
have five sirs [about a third of a kilogram] of gold
around their necks. Why shouldn’t our pure, honor¬
able ‘ulama' have discovered the truth of this?
European: You poor teacher! If you think that I
do not know the state of the ‘ulama ’ of Bukhara, you
are mistaken. I am well aware that the ‘ulama’ ran
after boys in the streets during the period of study,
and spend their nights in some corner drinking. After
they have finished [their studies], they debase their
manhood for a pittance at the door of a qadi [judge].
As soon as they have become a qadi or a government
official, they seize the lives and property of the poor
unfortunate people as if they were an inheritance
from their fathers. If they become a great teacher or
religious leader, they drink the blood of their students
who are far from home, in the name of the “opening”
[of the school year] and gifts. How can we have any
hope of miracles from this group? What you said
about each one teaching a thousand students is true,
but tell me what they teach. What science do they
teach those thousand poor souls that will serve them
any use in this world or the next? In exchange for
selling their property for twenty years to give gifts
to their honorable teachers, what do they learn other
than the nature of the lam of hamd and the augmen¬
tation of the third radical [elegant Arabic grammati¬
cal details] and other such trivia? What benefit is
there for their religion or their world from learning
this nonsense? And what does this practice of the
Magi [the Zoroastrians, or polytheists in general] of
putting five sirs of gold around their horses’ necks
have to do with miracles?
246 Abdurrauf Fitrat
teacher: (With great fear) You stupid prattler, are
you calling our ‘ularna ’ Magi?
European: Never. Never would I think such a rude
thought about your ‘ulama ', but I do say that this con¬
duct of theirs has nothing to do with miracles. Further¬
more, your sharVa does not permit such activity.
teacher: What do you mean it does not permit it?
These things are the glory of learning, and the shari ‘a
orders that learning be glorified.
European: It is strange that you have brought up
a religious question again. You Bukharans are de¬
ceived, and are neglectful of the truth of the com¬
mands of your religion. During his whole lifetime
your Prophet never needlessly mounted his horse, to
say nothing of putting five sirs of gold around its
neck and deploying several retainers out ahead, If you
look carefully at the history of the great men and
‘ulama ’ of your faith, you will see what their life was
like, what their state was, what their habits were.
Then you will understand clearly that your conduct
is nothing but an offshoot of the conduct of the Magi.
In the light of all these illegalities, with what con¬
science do you make claims to miracles?
teacher: Alright, let’s put miracles aside. One of
the reputable members of the ‘ulama ’ who became a
teacher and who has studied these new principles
carefully, informed the rest of the ‘ulama’.
European: Although I am very sorry that your
‘ulama’ accepted this pure lie without any proof, and
although it is my duty to seek the reasons from you,
still my aim is to awaken you from the sleep of ne¬
glect. Therefore I must explain to you about that
teacher who calls reformers infidels and who calls
useful new principles illegal. Please tell me, was that
man a native of Bukhara or a foreigner?
teacher: He was a foreigner.
European: Was he an Ottoman or an Iranian
subject?
teacher: He was a Russian subject.
European: From which group was he?
teacher: He was a Tatar.
European: Do you know anything about him? In
other words, do you know how great a traitor this man
was to his own people and country?
teacher: No.
European: This man so betrayed his fellow coun¬
trymen in religious and worldly affairs that today he
is cursed by every feeling Tatar.
teacher: Again you have begun speaking ill of
our ‘ulama’.
European: I am not speaking ill of them. I am
speaking the truth, for they say that one should not
hide the truth. That person is a traitor. He never spares
any Muslim evil. Now, by arousing you to forbid the
new schools and by bringing harm to Islam, he seeks
a reward from the enemies of Islam. If you wish, I
will enumerate right now the injuries that he has
caused to his people and country.
teacher: No, there is no need to do so. Since I do
not know anything about that, I cannot confirm what
you have said. In any case, no intelligent person could
accept that a teacher from Bukhara could be a traitor.
European: Be still; do not reason falsely. In a city
where sometimes they make illiterates preachers, if
they make a traitor a teacher what is so strange about
that? How is that impossible?
teacher: I do not say that it is impossible. What I
am asking is that with what conscience can an intel¬
ligent and pious teacher betray his people and coun¬
try and bring harm to Islam in Bukhara in order to
be accepted by the enemies of the religion?
European: It is nonsense to characterize a teacher
as intelligent and pious, because in a country where
the position of preacher is not dependent on intelli¬
gence, to say nothing of piety, neither is the position
of teacher. Secondly, you ask with what conscience
can one question acceptance. Listen: with the same
conscience with which such and such a learned man
extorted money from his students, 2 or with which
such and such a religious official took a usurious
profit, or with which such and such a religious offi¬
cial committed indecent acts with a beardless youth,
betraying the entire world of Islam.
teacher: You cannot establish the legality of the
new schools with all this. The ‘ulama ’ of Bukhara,
nay all the people of Bukhara agree that the new
schools are unlawful.
European: The agreement of a group of people
on a matter without proof or reason is madness. It
brings about nothing and has no importance. Didn't
2. [Fitrat has a character explain this form of extortion
(joz' keshi ) elsewhere in the essay: “Each group of pupils has
a leader who is called the ‘reader to the group.’ At the time
of the distribution of the [school’s endowment stipend] funds,
the leader must write the names of those in his group and take
them to the teacher, so that the teacher can give him the
money to divide for them. Then the teacher orders the leader
to write down several more names on his list. Whatever is left
over after the division, the leader gives to the teacher."—
Trans.]
DEBATE BETWEEN A TEACHER AND A EUROPEAN 247
the infidels of Mecca agree on calling the Prophet
a liar? Don’t the Christians agree that the person of
God is a trinity? Just as their agreement has no credi¬
bility, neither has yours. Unanimity must be based
on logical and traditional proofs, not on surmise and
coercion.
teacher: My dear fellow, what business have you
saying such words; you who have not attended a
madrasa [seminary] and have not studied our sci¬
ences? The prophet said, “My people do not come
together in error.” When there is general agreement
there is no longer room for question.
European: Yes, yes, this hadith [saying of the
Prophet] is sufficient for the legality, even the ne¬
cessity of the new school. You yourself know that
you are not the only people in the Muslim commu¬
nity. Wherever there is Islam, there are Muhammad’s
people. Indian, Afghan, Ottoman, Arab, Tatar, and
Iranian Muslims generally affirm the necessity of
these schools, and you deny it. Although there is not
complete agreement, still look and see which side
the majority is on.
teacher: Since it was established among us that
this school was not legal, words like this have no
value.
European: With what proof was it so established?
teacher: This school would have made infidels
of our children.
European: The point is that I say and the whole
Islamic world says that it won’t make your children
infidels, but rather it will make them perfectly civil,
patriotic Muslims.
teacher: No, no. It is agreed that this school will
make our children infidels.
European: By God, if I asked you for proofs til
doomsday you would say nothing but “so and so said
it.” Nevertheless, let me ask you this: do you know
what they taught in this school that lasted for a year
in your city?
teacher: Yes, I know. At the end of the year they
sat for an examination on the subjects studied. Some
of the ‘ulama ’, including myself, were present. They
performed in a praiseworthy manner on the exami¬
nation. which covered reading and writing Persian,
introductory religious questions, history, ethics,
arithmetic, and geography.
European: At that time did any of the children utter
a blasphemous word or commit a disgusting act?
teacher: No, no. In that session the children were
all very polite and looked just like Muslims.
European: Did you see any blasphemous words
in the books that were in that school?
teacher: No. On the contrary, all the books were
useful and worth being taught.
European: Have you heard that any of those chil¬
dren uttered anything repugnant to Muslims outside
of school?
teacher: Never. On the contrary, unlike the chil¬
dren of the old schools, they did not enjoy childish
games and were disgusted by them.
European: Were the children of this school indo¬
lent in their ablutions and prayers, or were their ab¬
lutions and prayers otherwise?
teacher: It was never this way. On the contrary,
these children tried to outdo their elders in ablutions
and prayers.
European: Please stop joking. How can it be that
a seven-year-old child performs his ablutions and
prayers more properly than a seventy-year-old man?
teacher: What I said is correct; it is not a joke.
Most of our adults are not literate, and those who are
do not know anything more than two or three lyrics
of Hafiz [Persian poet, circa 1325-1390] and
[‘Alishir] Nava’i [Central Asian poet, 1441-1501],
while these children are well informed on religious
matters. It is for this reason that the children’s ablu¬
tions and prayers are more proper than those of the
adults.
European: Was the teacher of this school an infi¬
del or an unknown person?
teacher: Heaven forbid! Their teacher was a pious
Muslim and one of the learned men of Bukhara.
European: Then notwithstanding all these excel¬
lent qualities which you yourself have admitted, how
do you know that this school would have turned your
children into infidels?
teacher: Now you have started to argue again. I
did not say that this school was good. My point was
this: these good-for-nothing modernists, who can
outdo the devil in craft and trickery, have employed
good tools and excellent methods to make infidels
of our children. First, they make themselves look
benevolent by teaching religion to the children; then
as soon as they have deceived us, like that religious
official, they set to their basic task, which is making
our children unbelievers.
European: Is it true that a religious official became
a supporter of the new principles?
teacher: Yes, and one of his sons was in that
school.
248 Abdurrauf Fitrat
European: Is that religious official an educated
man, or is he like the ordinary religious officials of
Bukhara?
teacher: Ah! He is very much a scholar. Like the
rest of the great scholars, all of his learning is not just
in logic or grammar or theology. On the contrary, he
is an expert in all matters, be they religious, logical,
doctrinal, or philosophical. Moreover, he is pious and
would lay down his life for Islam.
European: Now, my dear sir, with regard to the
Noghay 3 teacher, you asked with what conscience
could he accept treachery. Why did you not wonder
with what conscience a person who in your words is
learned and pious, could be satisfied with having a
group of Muslims turned into unbelievers, one of
whom was his own son?
teacher: That religious official did not know the
truth about this school.
European: How could it be that an ignorant teacher
who did not even know the grammatical form of
zaraba Zayd [a typical example in elementary Ara¬
bic textbooks] could knowingly condemn the school,
and a famous, learned, and pious religious official
unwittingly declare it legal? Well, did you know in
how many years this school would have made infi¬
dels of your children?
teacher: Yes, in four years.
European: Do you know the “program” of this
school?
teacher: What is a “program”? Talk to me in the
language of Muslims [literally: speak “Muslim" to
me].
European: Well then, do you know the list of
courses in the new school?
teacher: When should I have examined these
unlawful books to know this?
European: Do the others of your ‘ulama ’ who have
condemned the new principles know, or not?
teacher: What an unintelligent man you are. One
man opened a new school, another declared it ille¬
gal, the ‘ulama ’ accepted this and closed the school.
Before this, who knew that such a school existed in
the world, to say nothing of its books.
European: Are your ‘ulama ’ not aware of the pas¬
sage in the Qur’an that says, “Do not utter the lies
your tongues make up: ‘This is lawful, and this is
3. [The Noghay were a Turkic people originally cen¬
tered around Kazan. The term was often used interchange¬
ably with Tatar.—Trans.]
forbidden’”; [Sura 16, Verse 116] that they should
condemn something without investigation, merely on
the word of a stranger? If you were truly educated
people and did not have corrupt personal interests,
certainly you would accept something that the whole
Islamic world has accepted and deemed necessary.
You would turn away from this vain fanaticism and
meaningless opposition, or at least investigate it so
that you would not be ashamed before the True Judge
on the day after the Resurrection. Now, I have a proof
of the harmlessness of this school even stronger than
the first one.
teacher: Tell me.
European: For some time these schools have been
open in Istanbul, Baghdad, Egypt, India, Noghayistan
[Tatarstan], and the Caucasus, and not one person in
any of these places has become an unbeliever. On the
contrary, they have attained perfection in their faith
and learning. Notice how in these times the Christians
have concentrated all their efforts on refuting Islam,
and every day write and publish a number of books to
this end. The ‘ulama ’ of Istanbul, India, and Egypt are
producing books hourly to refute them, and they en¬
gage their great priests in daily debates. I have not
heard that the ‘ulama’ of Bukhara, on the other
hand, have written one line to refute the Christians.
In this very year 1328 [1910] they have opened such
schools in Afghanistan and Medina, the Prophet’s
city. In Medina in particular, a great celebration was
held on the opening day of this school, and nobody
condemned it or said that it would make infidels of
their children. What makes you say such a thing?
teacher: Aside from producing unbelievers, this
new school is illegal in several other respects.
European: Fine. Now at least you have admitted
that this new school has not made infidels out of your
children.
teacher: Do you think that I have gone mad that
I should admit such a thing? After four years this
new school would certainly have made our children
infidels.
European: What proof do you have?
teacher: What proof is needed? The Noghay
teacher said so.
European: Do you have any evidence other than
the word of this Noghay?
teacher: No.
European: How strange! Why do you believe a
foreigner whose disloyalty and trouble-making are
known to all, who lied in order to secure his liveli-
DEBATE BETWEEN A TEACHER AND A EUROPEAN 249
hood, and disbelieve me when I produce tangible
evidence? For example, I say that these schools have
been operating for some time in Istanbul, Egypt,
Baghdad, India, Noghayistan, and the Caucasus, and
still have not made an infidel out of anyone. On the
contrary, they have made all of the students more
learned, more civilized, and more patriotic than be¬
fore. Thus it is clear that the statement of that Noghay
fellow who said that in four years it would make the
children infidels was a lie. In addition, this year such
schools were opened in Afghanistan and Medina and
nobody said anything [against them]. From this it is
clear that that Noghay’s statement was a fraud. Now,
since you have seen India, tell me whether the people
there keep the shari‘a more firmly than the
Bukharans or not.
teacher: The Indians were better Muslims than
the Bukharans.
European: Have you seen or heard that any of the
Muslims there [that is, in India] have denied the unity
of God or the prophethood of Muhammad or the truth
of the Qur’an or any of the commands of the shari‘al
teacher: Absolutely not! They are excellent
Muslims.
European: A new school has been open there for
twenty years, and according to your own words it has
not made any of them unbelievers. Is there any fur¬
ther doubt as to the untruth of that Noghay’s words?
teacher: Suppose that the new schools do not
make infidels of our children. They are still illegal
for several other reasons.
European: Illegality is another problem. Now,
after my statement, can you still affirm what that
corrupt Nogay said?
teacher: All right. From what you have said, I
know that these schools would not make unbeliev¬
ers of our children. I still have a little doubt, though.
European: About what?
teacher: Why did that Noghay teacher tell such
a useless lie for nothing?
European: I answered this objection before. Since
it was established that that person is a traitor to the
people, then he did not just tell that lie for nothing
but found some profit in it.
teacher: That is clear, but with what conscience
can a Muslim scholar act to harm Islam?
European: O dear! I have told you several times
that most of your scholars have no conscience. With
what conscience can such and such a learned man
engage in treachery, or a certain religious official take
usury, or this or that religious official behave improp¬
erly with a beardless youth? This teacher, too,
worked on behalf of the unbelievers against Islam.
Now what do you say? Are you certain that the new
school would not make unbelievers of your children?
teacher: Yes!
European: Do you understand that this Noghay
fellow uttered this lie on behalf of the enemies of
Islam?
teacher: Yes!
European: Then what do you say about the new
school?
teacher: The school is illegal.
European: For what reason?
teacher: We have a thousand reasons.
European: Fine. Now if you state all of your rea¬
sons at once and then I answer them, the matter will
not become clear. It would be better if you gave your
reasons one by one so that we can examine them.
teacher: My first reason is that in this school the
children sit on chairs.
European: Very well, what happened because of
this?
teacher: You do not know the shari'a. The
Prophet said: “He who likens himself to a people,
then he is one of them.” Sitting on a chair is a Rus¬
sian practice. If the children sit on chairs, through this
imitation of the Russians they will become Russians
themselves.
European: Bravo, honorable traditionist [that is,
one who studies the hadiths, or traditions, of the
Prophet]. First of all, the man who uttered the hadith
that you quoted also said: “He who says ‘There is no
God but God’ shall not enter the fire.” That is to say
that whoever proclaims the unity of God will not go
to hell. If the meaning of the first hadith is what you
mean, then these two hadiths are contrary to each
other. You hear one hadith from your fathers and
grandfathers, but you do not examine the books of
hadith carefully. The great hadith scholars explain
the above hadith in this manner: “He who likens him¬
self unto a people out of love for them and inclines
toward their religion, then he is one of them.” Sec¬
ond, if this much imitation is sufficient for becom¬
ing an infidel, then your ‘ulama ’ are Magi because
their custom of adorning their horses’ heads and
necks with gold and silver is a custom of the Magi.
Third, God created your eyes and ears like the eyes
and ears of the Russians. What harm has come to your
religion from this?
250 Abdurrauf Fitrat
Fourth, the Russians did not invent chair-sitting.
The first person to sit on a chair was one of the great
Companions, Mu‘awiyya ibn Abi Sufyan [first
Umayyad caliph, reigned 661-680]. Fifth, examine
your conscience for a moment. How can it be that
someone who reads the Qur’ an (which was sent down
by the Creator of the world and its creatures through
a mighty angel to the Best of Creatures, that is, the
Messenger of God) while he is sitting on the ground
or on thorns and rubbish is called a Muslim, while
someone who reads it with the greatest reverence
while sitting on a chair is called an infidel? Sixth, if
you close an Islamic school because the students
there sit on chairs, then why do you allow the Rus¬
sian school to continue even though they both sit on
chairs and learn the Russian language there?
Seventh, in a country where the leaders drink the
blood of the people and commit adultery, where the
‘ulama ’ make a usurious profit, betray the rights of
the pupils and create discord among the Muslims,
where the students drink alcohol, and where the rich
have ceased paying alms and commit a great many
sins and nobody has prevented them from doing this,
nor will they, why do you forbid a useful school just
because of chair-sitting? If your ‘ulama’ are really
‘ulama ’, they should be “the heirs of the prophets”
and “like the prophets of Israel.” In spite of the fact
that God had prohibited oppression in the verses
“God does not wish injustice to the creatures of the
world” [Sura 3, Verse 108] and “God does not show
the unrighteous the way,” [Sura 3, Verse 86] why
don’t they strive to root out the basis of oppression,
which is so widespread in Bukhara? For example, in
spite of the fact that a single spark of the oppression
and despotism of a certain governor burned a vast
area of—[the region is left unnamed], so that 20,000
of Muhammad’s people emigrated from there to
neighboring countries, nobody has asked what is
becoming of them, or why they left their homeland,
or what the reason is for the ruin of their homes. On
the contrary, they made the oppressor the supporter
of the—government, and a flood of oppression by
such and such a judge ruined the prosperous state
of—, uprooted the foundation of a decent life for
God’s creatures, and claiming that he was wise and
pious, the government was given over to him.
Praise God, I still remember that in Marv I met
one of those fleeing from the despotism of—. I asked
the reason for his flight, and he said, “I had a beauti¬
ful wife. Apparently the eldest son of our governor
had heard of her. To satisfy his lust and desire, he
sent for me and asked me to send her to him. I re¬
fused, and however many sweet promises and fearful
threats he made, I refused more firmly. They had no
choice but to let me go. Four days later the sergeant-
at-arms of the governor came to see me looking like
one of the chief guardians of Hell and, accusing me
of burglary, bound me hand and foot and carried me
away. As soon as the governor’s eyes fell on me, it
was as if I had escaped several times from him, and
without any investigation he put me in jail. After I
had spent some time in prison I was forced to present
2,000 tangas 4 to the governor and a thousand to his
men, and I was set free. Hoping for some peace, I
hurried home. As soon as I reached my house, alas,
I saw that the door was open, and there was no sign
of my wife and property. I ran here and there like a
madman. One of the neighbors said that after I had
been jailed, the godless son of the governor sent
someone to my wife. The poor thing was afraid and
escaped without telling anybody, and the oppressor
was so angry that he ordered my property seized.
When I heard this I could not bear to stay there any
longer. I found my wife in another village, sold my
house cheaply, and came here.”
Amazing! Aren’t these unfortunate people human
beings? Aren’t they Muhammad’s people? Did God
not lay down the foundations of justice for the well¬
being of the people? Doesn’t the shari'a forbid op¬
pression so that they may rest easy? I can say with
complete confidence that today in every corner of
Bukhara a thousand kinds of oppression and cruelty
exist, of which the above story is a mild example.
However hardhearted, beastly, and pitiless a person
may be, it is impossible not to weep at the ruined state
of this fallen people. Yes, it is just this that provided
the means for the Russian conquest. It is this same
oppression that has turned prosperous Bukhara into
a land more ruined than the worst wasteland else¬
where. If I ask people, from water-carriers and por¬
ters to the greatest nobles of Bukhara, they will all
be in accord in preferring the Russian government,
which is hostile to Islam, to this irreligious Islam.
The result of this is obvious. If your ‘ulama’ are
really 'ulama ', then let them think about putting into
effect the divine commands. Let them clear the field
4. [A coin used in Central Asia and northern India, worth
approximately 15 Russian kopeks in late nineteenth and early
twentieth century Bukhara.—Trans.]
DEBATE BETWEEN A TEACHER AND A EUROPEAN 25 I
in the name of God and bring some progress to Islam.
Let them free a group of Muhammad’s people from
the weight of oppression and rescue Islam from the
domination of infidels. Let them prevent a governor
who is neither God nor prophet nor saint nor angel,
who has neither four eyes nor eight feet, who is nei¬
ther learned in religion nor artful in politics, who is
also, in short, illiterate, from imprisoning one of the
best of his subjects, causing his wife to flee, and plun¬
dering his property.
teacher: These things are not the responsibility
of the ‘ ulama ’, but of the amir [the ruler]. How can
the ‘ulama ’ speak against the amirl
European: You are lying! His Majesty the amir
would never, under any circumstances, countenance
such oppression of his subjects. The fact is that His
Excellency is alone, and it is humanly impossible for
him personally to watch the condition of each of his
subjects individually. Therefore he sends a person as
governor over a group of people. This person collects
what they owe to the treasury and maintains order
among them. He sends two trustworthy members of
the ‘ulama ’, designated as qadi and ra ’is [religious
leader], along with him to observe his behavior. As
soon as he commits an unlawful action, they report
it so that he can be dismissed. As soon as these two
members of the ‘ ulama ' reach there, they begin
every kind of illegal behavior, to say nothing of lead¬
ing the governor down a bloodthirsty path. While the
unfortunate subjects have no sleep as a result of the
wounds of the spears of oppression from these three
enemies of mankind, they report to the king that the
people are sleeping in the cradle of ease. If the cries
of the miserable oppressed should deafen the ears of
those in heaven, they write that the people do noth¬
ing but pray that the government be everlasting and
daily-improving. If it should happen one day that
these oppressed people think that they have a king,
and that their king is just and kind, and that they
should go and present a petition to the king in the
hope that he would free them from the tortures of
these grandsons of the Lord of Hell, it would do them
no good to arrive at the royal court. Despotic wolves
have so surrounded the king that even if the peoples’
petition became a mosquito and escaped their notice,
it would be impossible for it to reach the king. No.
Halfway along they [the courtiers] would tear up the
petition, lie to the amir , cause the people to be se¬
verely flogged, send them back, and they would re¬
turn to their homes in a worse state than before. Now,
tell me what the fault of the amir was in this. In 1327
[1909-1910], when Tura Khwaja Sudur was ap¬
pointed governor of Qarshi, he reported the oppres¬
sion of the judges to the late amir . A royal edict was
issued ordering the judges and chiefs to limit and fix
the gratuities of their attendants. Unfortunately, the
good Sudur was the only person who carried out the
order. If you ‘ulama ’ would report the oppression of
the governors to the king and say that cruel governors
are giving the king a bad name, and if you say that a
despotic government—in keeping with the verse “the
wicked will have none to help them” [Qur’an, Sura 2,
Verse 270; Sura 3, Verse 192; Sura 5, Verse 72]—will
not endure, certainly he will accept what you say. But
what is the use; you ‘ulama' of Bukhara are always
busy with your sensual desires and have not thought
of the progress of Islam or carrying out the divine
commands. Truly we have strayed from our subject.
What other proofs do you have of the illegality of this
school?
teacher: If this school should remain in Bukhara
for 10 years, all of the schools would be ruined and
studying would collapse.
European: If your point here is that learning would
be removed from Bukhara, or, in other words, that
those associated with the schools would consider the
acquisition of knowledge as blasphemy or a sin, then
this is false. Just as I have said before, these schools
have been operating for years in India, Baghdad,
Egypt, the Caucasus, and Kazan, and the inhabitants
of these places are many times more learned than the
Bukharans. You have admitted that the Indians are
more learned and pious than the Bukharans. If you
say that “the special method of study that the
Bukharans have will be ruined and another substi¬
tuted for it,” what harm for the world of Islam would
this have? Let us look at this matter in some detail.
The old method of study, according to you, was
like this: the children at age seven go to school and
study for ten years and learn to read and write Per¬
sian. After this they toil in the seminary, pay all that
they own to the schoolmaster, study for twenty years,
and finish not knowing any more than the nature of
the lam of hamd and the augmentation of the third
radical. Even after studying Arabic for twenty years
they are unable to speak it. After they finish, instead
of going out to serve Islam and guide the people to
the right path, they trample their human dignity under¬
foot before their fellow men for a meager livelihood.
For a minor teaching job they make an illiterate
252 Abdurrauf Fitrat
judge’s house into the exalted Ka’ba [the sacred site
in Mecca] and his doormen into angels of mercy.
The new method of study is this: A child is sent
to school at the age of six. At nineteen, the child has
become a learned, pious, patriotic, religious, nation¬
alistic, honest, and just person, obedient to all the
commands of Islam and possessed of all the charac¬
teristics of humanity. The period of study in the old
school and seminary was thirty years, and in the new
one, thirteen years.
The quality of the old studies was thus: first of all
the student enters upon ten years in a miserable,
wretched, dark, stuffy room, strongly resembling a
comer of a prison or a stable. Every day they have
two lessons, accompanied by blows and humiliation
from a teacher of the character of the Angel of Death.
This is how it goes: “read and pass on!” Nobody cares
whether yesterday’s lesson is well learned or today’s
understood.
The nature of the new studies is this: The pupils
enter a large building which is pleasant and exhila¬
rating, and which has been built according to hy¬
gienic principles. It is situated among spacious gar¬
dens and seems like a castle in heaven. Every day
they have three lessons (on which they will be ex¬
amined) from noble, well-favored teachers who do
not frown. Between each lesson they have a recess
of 15 minutes in the gardens.
The results of the old studies are this: During their
period of study the students do no gainful work and
spend most of their time in the direst poverty and
indebtedness. Because they are so poor they do not
marry. After they finish at the age of thirty-seven they
must spend at least three years wandering about in
search of a livelihood, and by that time they are forty.
It is clear that the life span of many of today’s men
is forty years. Then most of the graduates die with¬
out marrying, to say nothing of repaying their debts.
Thus the population of Muslims will decrease and
some Muslims carry off the property of the people,
which is against the shari'a.
The results of the new studies are these: The chil¬
dren of the rich will study in private schools, and poor
children will attend public schools. They will study
in all comfort, and after they have finished, whatever
work they turn their hands to—be it teaching, the
military, trade, craftsmanship, shopkeeping, or farm¬
ing—they will find their job easily and without hu¬
miliation, and perform it well. Under the old system,
because of the length of the course, they withheld
from women the dignity of acquiring knowledge, not
conforming to the hadith that says, “Seeking knowl¬
edge is obligatory for all Muslim men and women.”
Under the new system, they send a girl to school at
the age of six. If they so desire, they may give an
educated girl, capable of reading the [Qur’anic] com¬
mentaries and hadith , to be married at the age of eigh¬
teen or fourteen. It is clear now that wherever the new
system is in effect for ten years, the old system will
naturally break down. This will not harm Islam; on
the contrary, it will benefit it.
teacher: How can it not be of harm to Islam? The
system which the religious scholars, the sages, and
our fathers and grandfathers endured will pass away
and a new system, invented by unbelievers, will take
its place.
European: First of all, the new school is not the
invention of unbelievers. Even if it had been invented
by the infidels, since it is beneficial to the Muslims
in their present condition, what part of the world
would be ruined if they adopted it?
teacher: No part of the world would be ruined,
but if we prefer the new principles to our old system,
of necessity we will be preferring infidelity to Islam.
European: Just as the new principles were not in¬
vented by the unbelievers, neither is the old system
the method of the great men and religious scholars
of Islam, such that it would become necessary to
prefer infidelity to Islam. Imagine that your method
was the method of the great men and religious schol¬
ars of Islam; today you have found an easier and more
useful method. If you should adopt this, what harm
would it have for Islam?
For example, after your fathers and the great men
and religious scholars set out on the pilgrimage, they
would mount a horse or an ass and spend six months
getting from Bukhara to Baghdad or Bombay. From
there they would board a sailing ship and in a year’s
time reach Mecca. After performing the pilgrimage
it would be three years and some months before they
returned to Bukhara. Now that the infidels have in¬
vented trains and steamships, everybody has com¬
pletely abandoned the way that the great men of your
religion traveled, and in the space of twenty-five days
they reach Mecca by a means which the infidels in¬
vented. The religion has not been lost, and the world
has not been ruined. On the contrary, in Bukhara in
the old days only twenty people a year were able to
make the trip to the Ka’ba, while now a thousand
people go. The question of studying is just the same.
DEBATE BETWEEN A TEACHER AND A EUROPEAN 253
Under the old system, women are deprived of learn¬
ing and most of the men live in illiteracy, and in every
generation one or two great scholars appear. Under
the new system, because it is easier, both women and
men will become learned.
Similarly, during the time of the Prophet and his
companions the Qur'an was written in Kufic script
on the shoulder-blades of sheep. Fora long time now
they have been writing it on paper in the naskh script
because it is easier, and still the sky has not fallen
down. The question of studies is the same. The will
of God that matters be facilitated is the basis of the
shari ‘a, as He says, “God wishes ease and not hard¬
ship for you,” [Sura 2, Verse 185] and “God would
like to lighten your burden, for man was created
weak.” [Sura 4, Verse 28]
35
Musa Jarullah Bigi
Why Did the Muslim World Decline While
the Civilized World Advanced?
Religious scholar, journalist, politician, and author, Musa Jarullah Bigi (Russian Tatarstan,
1875-1949) was one of the most important figures of the Modernist Islamic movement
in Russia, Bom in Rostov-on-Don, Bigi was raised by his mother, who sent him to a Russian
elementary school. He was later trained at religious schools in Kazan, Bukhara, Istanbul,
and Cairo, where he studied with an associate of Muhammad ‘Abduh (chapter 3). On
his return to Russia, he turned to political activism, attending and recording the discus¬
sions of the major meetings of the Muslims of Russia. In addition, he taught at a reformist
seminary in Orenburg, wrote articles for the reformist press, translated Sufi classics into
Tatar, and wrote several books on Islamic junsprudence. Bigi's work was widely read by
religious scholars in Russia and the Ottoman Empire, but not always well received, Bigi
was so outspoken in his espousal of Western science and his criticism of traditional Is¬
lamic scholarship that even some of his fellow modernists disapproved, Traditionalists
called him a heretic. His books were banned by Ottoman authorities, and he was forced
to leave Orenburg because of conservatives’ hostility. In this typically strongly worded
selection, Bigi ascribes the progress of the “civilized world’’—which he equates with
Europe—to the freedom of thought generated by the Protestant Reformation. He stops
short of calling for an equivalent Reformation in Islam, but the selection makes clear why
Bigi’s critics accused him of aspiring to serve as the “Martin Luther of Islam.” 1
Today there is a large gap between Europe and the
Muslim world. The former, determined never to step
down, has established itself on the thrones of leader¬
ship, politics, and governance; occupied the treasures
of the whole world; and concentrated all power in its
own hand. The latter, like a captive, was deprived of
all political life, and cannot even manage its own
affairs. Like a convict, the Muslim world remains
everywhere under someone else’s control.
There must be a reason for this disparity. While
there may be secondary reasons, the real reason is one.
However, it is difficult to demonstrate it clearly. It is
often difficult to determine properly the real reasons
in historical facts and social situations. The civilized
world has striven, through the power of the sciences
and education, to subjugate both nature and nations.
At the same time, the Muslim world has remained inert
and remiss. For this reason, the Muslim world declined
while the civilized world advanced.
Was that the main reason?
If this was the main reason, what accounts for the
former’s striving and the latter’s inertia?
The light of the sciences and education started in
the civilized world in the eighth century. Why then
did it remain weak for so many centuries? Why did
it die out each time it arose? Why didn’t it come to
life until the sixteenth century? Why couldn’t the
effects of progress became widespread [until then]?
Beginning in early sixteenth century Germany,
the mind of the civilized world freed itself through
Musa Jarullah Bigi [Bigiyef], Khalq Nazarina Bir Nichd
Mas'ala (Several Problems for Public Consideration )
(Kazan, Tatarstan, Russia: Aliktro-Tipografiya Umid, 1912),
pp. 33-39. Translation from Tatar and introduction by Ahmet
Kanlidere.
1. Ahmet Kanlidere, Reform within Islam: The Tajdid and
Jadid Movement among the Kazan Tatars ( 1809-1917] (Istan¬
bul, Turkey: Eren Yayincilik. 1997), pp. 52-56; Azade-Ayge
Rorlich, The Volga Tatars (Stanford, Calif.: Hoover Institution
Press, 1986), pp. 59-61; Abdullah Battal-Taymas, Musa Carul-
lah Bigi (Istanbul, Turkey: Siralar Matbaasi, 1958); Ahmet
Kanlidere, “Rusya Tiirklerinden Musa Carullah Bigi (1875-
1949)” (Musa Jarullah Bigi (1875-1949) of the Russian Turks),
M.A. thesis, Marmara Universitesi, Istanbul, Turkey. 1988.
254
WHY DID THE MUSLIM WORLD DECLINE? 255
the [Protestant] Reformation from religious restric¬
tions and the captivity of the clergy, allowing science
and knowledge to breathe freely.
The Reformation, beginning with small issues,
rapidly gained great power and provided crucially
important ingredients for the civilized world: humans
attained their humanity, reason achieved its au¬
tonomy, its independence, its freedom, its power.
From that time on, human reason moved quickly,
unchecked, and began to conquer all the treasures of
nature. Mankind recovered its powers of understand¬
ing, its powers of action, from the hands of the Catho¬
lic clergy and began to move eagerly on the path of
science and action. Progress was impossible when
reason was imprisoned by popes within the walls of
the church. In recent centuries, the works of progress
developed rapidly.
The civilized world progressed by saving reason
from church authority. At the same time, Muslim
madrasas [schools] were busy studying the commen¬
taries of medieval theology [kalam], Muslim writers
were addicted to, and were proud of, writing com¬
mentaries on such texts. At that time, the mind of the
Muslims was captive in the hands of unoriginal ju¬
risprudents and philosophers. It must have been this
widespread stoppage of brains that caused the mind
of the Muslim world to remain lifeless and motion¬
less, and therefore to decline.
The days of the great reformer Martin Luther
[German founder of Protestantism, 1483-1546] co¬
incided with the days of the greatest of the Ottoman
sultans, Sulayman the Magnificent [1494-1566]. At
that time Christian states were weaker than the [Ot¬
toman] Islamic state. However, through reformers
like Martin Luther, the Christian world entered on the
path of progress; meanwhile, through religious schol¬
ars and leaders such as Ibn Kemal [Kemalpa§azade,
Turkish scholar, circa 1468-1534] and [Mehmed]
Ebussu’ud [Efendi, Turkish religious leader, circa
1491-1574], the Muslim world went into decline.
That is, while the civilized world progressed through
the freedom of reason, through the captivity of rea¬
son the Muslim world declined.
As if prophesying these great historical facts, the
blind Muslim philosopher Abu al-‘Ala’ [al-Ma‘arri,
Arab poet, 973-1057] said in his Luzumiyyat [Ne¬
cessities]:
They progressed but we went to sleep.
They rose up thanks to our decline.
The ways of progress naturally differ from the beds
of ignorance.
If a person’s mind becomes captive and is de¬
prived of reason and judgment, it weakens the will
for activity, and that person suffers the sickness of
inertia. Then even a weak thing can have a great in¬
fluence on that person.
It must be for this reason that monastical ideas,
spread by dervishes—sermons ceaselessly cursing
this-worldly life, thoughts seeking comfort and hap¬
piness in poverty, Sufi philosophy seeing Satan’s
work in everything—become influential on the minds
and hearts of Muslims suffering from captivity.
For this reason, the Muslim world languished in
inertia, intellectually and physically. For this reason,
the Muslim world went into decline, while the civi¬
lized world progressed. For this reason, a big gap
opened between the Muslim world and the civilized
world. For this reason, one descended into captivity,
while the other was promoted to the honor of rulership.
This is my approach in this matter. This opinion
became clear in my mind after studying the political
and cultural history of Islam. My conviction became
even clearer when I read the works of authors writ¬
ing about the reasons for the [Muslims’] contempo¬
rary situation and remedies for recovery.
Because of the belief that strengthened in my heart,
I began to act, consciously or unconsciously. What¬
ever I wrote, whatever I said, it was all with the guid¬
ance of this belief. In every word of mine, in every line
I wrote, I had only one thought: to free reason from
its captivity; to demolish the confines built by the
madhhabs [schools of Islamic law]; to break the
restrictions of the madhhabs completely; to liberate
our free will and willpower from their weakness. That
is, to free our reason and to strengthen our willpower.
This was my sole purpose, for the main reason for
the current situation of the whole Muslim world was
the captivity of reason and weakness of willpower.
I certainly believe in the righteousness, greatness,
holiness, and heavenliness of Islam. For this reason,
the teachings of such a holy religion as Islam should
not be confined to the narrow circles of the mad¬
hhabs. It is a great error to confine Islam to such
narrow circles. This is the reason that I deny the limi¬
tations of the madhhabs.
According to Islam, reason did not used to be
confined. It was unrestrained and respected as the
proof of the divine. Islamic governments viewed the
freedom of reason and thought as fundamental rights,
256 Musa Jarullah Bigi
as natural rights. In the age of the salaf [the pious
ancestors; the first Muslims], there was no narrow¬
ness favoring any single madhhab. Abandoning rea¬
son, confining its power, seeing sciences and educa¬
tion as enemies and cursing its members, labeling
freedom as unbelief—all of this insanity must have
spread to Islamic philosophers from the Inquisition
courts, which continued in the Catholic world for
seven centuries. Otherwise, such insanity could never
have been reconciled with the spirit of Islam.
The brutality of the Inquisition spread easily into
the blood of Islamic philosophers, poisoned by dis¬
putes, into the hearts of philosophers swollen with the
desire to maintain appearances and break minds. In the
name of religion, the Islamic philosophers imposed
this brutality on the Muslim world. This calamity,
introduced in the name of religion, took root in the
minds and hearts [of Muslims]. For this reason, the
mind of the Islamic world, its willpower, virtually all
its strength became captive. This captivity was the
main cause of all disorders and calamities.
Escaping this captivity is the only way to enter
onto the path of healthiness. Without freeing mind
and willpower, all other remedies are useless and
fruitless.
For this reason, I pursued a career of freedom
in reasoning, thought, and understanding. I denied
the restrictions favored by the followers of the madh-
habs and stood courageously against the experts of
the madhhabs in many matters. This was not intended
to suggest that the great ones of the past were in
error, but to demonstrate my belief in the freedom of
thought and reason, my belief in Islam’s sublime
expansiveness.
I devoted myself to this career, which was like a
prologue to our salvation from captivity. It was not
harmful for the future, but certainly useful.
I limited myself to writing novels and such, be¬
cause I doubted my poetic abilities would produce
great literature, my mind would produce great
thoughts, and my heart would produce great emo¬
tions. I saw no use in introducing small thoughts and
low feelings into readers’ hearts.
I presented many issues to the Muslims of Russia
to destroy and demolish the restrictions imposed upon
the human mind, willpower, and thought by the ex¬
perts of the madhhabs. Surely my intentions were
good. If this goal is achieved, its benefits would be
great. None of these were minor issues. In view of the
situation of our society, in view of the continuous
development of the teachings of Islam, all of these
issues were definitely important. Certainly, these is¬
sues were more beautiful than love stories and other
erotic works, and without their ill effects.
I would like, God willing, to discuss some of the
most important of these matters in the next chapter.
To conclude this chapter, allow me to present my
opinion of our contemporary literature.
In my opinion, the language of our literature is
not very correct. Our literature is full of errors of
grammar, syntax, and rhetoric. If today’s writers
corrupt our language through negligence, the lan¬
guage developed by our ancestors will deteriorate.
The branches of Turki, originally derived from a
single source, will bear no fruit for [Pan-Turkic]
unity, and will grow further and further apart.
In my opinion, our contemporary literary produc¬
tion is not suitable to our needs. Love stories, trans¬
lations from other nations’ novels, frivolous and fool¬
ish works, and eroticism—none of this is suitable to
our needs.
The civilized world has everything. Our future
will not please us if we—who are weak in all respects,
with all our needs unmet—imitate only the play and
games of the civilized world, if we close our ears to
the lessons of the civilized world’s “bitter experi¬
ence,” if we close our eyes to the causes of ever-
increasing murder, dissipation, poverty, and illness.
What we need today is to restrict our literature to
serious works; to adopt with all our strength what we
need from the civilized world, such as science, edu¬
cation, and industry; to put aside plays and novels;
to educate our children with the spirit of trade, agri¬
culture, and activity.
In my opinion, this alone is the path to salvation
and the road to progress.
36
Mahmud Khoja Behbudiy
The Patricide
Mahmud Khoja Behbudiy (Samarqand, 1874-1919) was the leading figure among the
reformist intellectuals of Russian Central Asia, Bom on the outskirts of Samarqand in a
family of Islamic scholars, Behbudiy received a traditional Islamic education and worked
for most of his life as qazi (judge) and mufti (jurisconsult). An eight-month trip to Arabia,
Transcaucasia, Istanbul, and Cairo brought Behbudiy in contact with currents of cultural
reform in the wider Muslim world. Upon his return to Samarqand, Behbudiy began his
public career, writing in support for the reform of Muslim education, social customs, and
public mores. Behbudi contributed copiously to every newspaper published in Central
Asia, In 191 3, he launched his own newspaper, Samarqand. When financial problems led
to its closure, Behbudiy started Ayina (The Mirror), a weekly magazine which he published
almost singlehandedly for the next twenty months. Behbudiy also wrote and published a
number of textbooks for new-method schools and established a reading room in
Samarqand. Behbudiy was also an advocate of the theater, primarily because he saw it as
an effective way of spreading the message of reform. In 1913, he published Padarkush
(The Patricide ), the first modern play written in Central Asia, and presented here in trans¬
lation. The earnest didacticism of the text is typical of modernist writing in Central Asia,
as is the faith in the power of knowledge and education to cure all social ills, 1
Dedicated to the present jubilee commemoration of
the Battle of Borodino [1812], and of delivering
Russia from the invasion of the French.
Cast of Characters
Mr. Rich [Bay], 2 50 years old
Tashmurad (Young Mr. Rich), Mr. Rich’s son, 15
to 17 years old
Mentor, a mulla [religious teacher] with modern
ideas, 30-40 years old
Intellectual (in European clothes), a Muslim nation¬
alist who has learned Russian
Khayrullah, Mr. Rich’s private secretary, 18-20
years old
Tangriqul, murderer of Mr. Rich
Mahmud Khoja Behbudiy, Padarkush (The Patricide), trans¬
lated from Uzbek by Edward A. Allworth in “Murder as
Metaphor in the First Central Asian Drama,” Ural-Altaischer
Jahrbiicher/Ural-Altaic Yearbook , volume 58, 1986, pp. 84-
93. First published in 1913. Introduction by Adeeb Khalid.
1. Ahmad Aliyev, Mahmudkho’ja Behbudiy (Tashkent,
Uzbekistan: Yozuvchi, 1994); D. Alimova and D. Rashidova,
Makhmudkhodzha Bekhbudii i ego Istoricheskie Vozzreniia
(Mahmud Khoja Behbudiy and his Historical Vision) (Tash¬
kent, Uzbekistan: Ma’naviyat, 1998); Stephane A. Dudoignon,
Dawlat and Nar (green youths)
Liza, Russian woman of ill repute
Artun, Armenian tavemkeeper
Police Chief, 2 Policemen, 2 Officers
3 Men (Mr. Rich’s neighbors)
Mrs. Rich, a woman of 35^10 years
First Act
(Mr. Rich sits in the front room with Khayrullah.)
mentor; (Enters.) Peace be upon you.
mr. rich: Upon you, too, if you please. (Stands
up, exchanges greetings, shows Mentor a place, sits
down.)
mentor: May God the Most High increase Bay’s
wealth even more than it is now (gives benediction).
“La question scolaire a Boukhara et au Turkestan russe” (The
Education Question in Bukhara and Russian Turkistan).
Cahiers du monde russe (Annals of the Russian World), vol¬
ume 37, 1996, pp. 133-210; Adeeb Khalid, The Politics of
Muslim Cultural Reform: Jadidism in Central Asia (Berkeley:
University of California Press, 1998).
2. [A bay is a rich man. The author does not give this
character a personal name.—Ed.]
257
258 Mahmud Khoja Behbudiy
mr. rich: 0 blessed soul, God grant that his
prayers are accepted.
mentor: Right, Friday evening is the time a prayer
is accepted.
mr. rich: Welcome, sir!
mentor: Good health, good health (places hands
on his breast).
mr. rich: Khayrullah! Bring some tea and a tray.
khayrullah: Very well. (Brings tea and tray.
Serves tea; they partake. Tashmurad comes in rudely,
without a greeting.)
tashmurad: Father! I'm going out for a good time.
Gi’me some money!
mr. rich: My son, who will you go with?
tashmurad: With big brother Tursun.
mr. rich: (Giving money from his purse.) Come
in on time, now, and don’t go to disreputable places!
tashmurad: So long, so long, oh you talk so much.
(Goes off.)
(Mentor looking at Mr. Rich and Tashmurad dis¬
approvingly, shakes his head.)
mr. rich: Let’s talk awhile together, sir!
mentor: Very well, very well. Young Bay has
grown up, I see. God grant him long life. Does he
study in a new method school or an old school?
mr. rich: Why, he studies in neither.
mentor: Do you expect to educate him in your
own home?
mr. rich: No, no. I certainly haven’t planned to
educate my son.
mentor: Really! Why don’t you educate him?
Learning is a religious duty, and besides, knowledge
is the reason for worldly honor and eternal nobility.
mr. rich: To my way of thinking, the reason for
worldly honor is wealth. As for the afterlife, God’s
will be done. So, we see that men honor the wealthy
man more than the learned man. Look, in particular,
the banks multiply, magnates become members,
everyone honors the members. Even the ones who
have business pay dearly for the members’ goods.
More than that, banks won’t give money to men who
haven’t obtained the courtesy of a member. Then,
businessmen go bankrupt and there are fewer and
fewer. Did you know that?
mentor: What you say suits the present day, but the
honors of members and wealthy men are ephemeral,
only until people’s eyes are opened. Meanwhile, just
those who have their own business respect them. As
for the learned man, the entire country honors him; in
other words, a learned man’s knowledge is honored.
mr. rich: Our wealth is honored, too—never mind
by Muslims alone—it’s honored among Russians and
Armenians, as well.
mentor: Let’s put honor aside. If you educate your
son, he will keep your accounts, he will know his
devotions and his Muslim way of life very well, and
he’ll become a reward for your good deeds.
MR. rich: Paperwork is easy. I give Khayrullah,
here, seven rubles a month. He does paperwork day¬
times and housework nights, and before I go to sleep
he even gives a massage and reads a book to me.
mentor: You must without fail educate young
B ay, so that he will know the field of Islamic law and
the religious requirements.
mr. rich: I don’t consider that teaching the field
of Islamic law is needed, for I have no intention of
making him a legal advisor or a prayer leader and
mosque clerk, inasmuch as my wealth will suffice for
him.
mentor: What do you say about the requirements
for religion?
mr. rich: I’m acquainted with the obligatory
prayers myself for the five worship times. I’ll give
instruction myself.
mentor: What do you say about reading and writ¬
ing? In fact, an illiterate man serves absolutely no
purpose.
mr. rich: There you’re mistaken, because I’m il¬
literate; nevertheless, I’m one of the magnates of this
city, and I know about everything.
mentor: Perhaps you became a wealthy man
somehow in an earlier day but now don’t dream of
becoming wealthy. Knowledge is required for some¬
one to live. We observe that over the past 20 to 30
years all business matters passed into the hands of
Armenians, Jews, and other foreigners. Our lack of
education is the reason for this. We see that unedu¬
cated, affluent young men waste their fathers’ prop¬
erty and finally become destitute; therefore, I suggest
that you educate your son.
mr. rich: O Mentor! Are you my inquisitor? The
son is mine, the wealth is mine; what is it to you?
You’re one of the educated people, but you’ve got
no bread to eat. Considering your plight, how can you
admonish me! Khayrullah! Lock up the living room.
I’m sleepy.
(Khayrullah gathers up the tray and dishes and
stands waiting.)
mentor: (Toward the audience:) Money must be
had for studying and becoming a learned man, but
THE PATRICIDE 259
here you have the attitude of our wealthy men. So, if
things go on like this, God preserve us. We shall be
disgraced on earth and in the Hereafter. Learning was
always a religious duty for every Muslim, male or
female. Where did it stop! Oh, my! In our predica¬
ment, (toward Mr. Rich:) Mr. Rich! I placed upon you
the obligation of doing a pious deed, and that way,
according to Islamic law, I relieved myself of respon¬
sibility for the affair, as I had to. God willing, we shall
observe the situation of your son, who sprouts a
mustache but does not say his ABC’s, even with a
switch to help him. And you will also be a sinner for
not educating him. (Mentor takes snuff.)
mr. rich: Say, Mentor! I don’t need an advisor.
You've annoyed me. (Toward the audience:) This man
made me miss my work and my sleep. Khayrullah!
Lock the living room. (Mentor, offended, quickly goes
out; Mr. Rich’s chagrin persists.)
(An educated Muslim enters, hangs up his over¬
coat and staff on a peg. Bay glances reluctantly again
and again).
intellectual: Peace be upon you.
mr. rich: (With aversion) Upon you, too.
Khayrullah! Bring a chair! This man won’t be able
to sit on the floor. (Brings chair.) (Bay sits, smokes
a cigarette.)
intellectual: Good Bay, I see you’re out of spir¬
its. Can you tell me why?
mr. rich: A certain mulla visited me just a short
while ago and said, “you don’t educate your son,”
and exasperated me terribly. It was so hard for me to
get rid of him that it was like throwing him out. We
went so far we almost had a brawl.
intellectual: Well, it must have been a divert¬
ing and interesting incident. (Toward the audience:)
God be praised! There seems to be a mulla in this
town who assigns pious deeds to the wealthy. One
must locate this good, upright mulla and visit him.
Dear Mr. Rich! Don’t let this upset you, but I have
also intended for some time to say a few words to
you about this exact thing. And, because the hour for
saying it seems to have been deferred until this very
moment, I’ll now ask that for a few minutes you lend
me your ear and let me speak about the benefits of
knowledge.
mr. rich: (Staring, again and again) Now I under¬
stand. You, too, want to press me, saying “educate
your son.” (Toward the audience:) Today I got up on
the wrong side of the bed. Things I had not even
thought of happened to me. Evidently, we fall out
of the frying pan into the fire. Khayrullah! Bring
me a water pipe! (Both silent.) (Water pipe comes,
Mr. Rich smokes, coughs.)
mr. rich: Khayrullah!
khayrullah: At your service, sir!
mr. rich: Make up my bedding. I’m sleepy
(yawns). Tomorrow there is a lot of work to do. One
must get to bed on time (again a yawn).
khayrullah: Right, at once.
intellectual: (Seriously) Dear Mr. Rich! I told
you I intend to speak about fields of knowledge
necessary for the nation, but you don’t seem to
want to hear my opinions! Once again I say: lend
me your ears. These words are valuable for you and
the nation!
mr. rich: Do you make people listen to your opin¬
ions by pressure and force? Or did you come to tor¬
ment me?
intellectual: No, in reality I came just now for
another matter, but I kept my vow about discussing
learning, and for this very reason have changed my
intention and decided to explain about knowledge to
you: If only wealthy men like Your Honor would
make an effort to educate the nation’s boys.
mr. rich: (Toward the people:) Oh, if only I had
not told the story about Mentor. All right, since you
will not drop it, say what you have to say as quickly
as possible. I’m getting sleepy (yawn, y- y- y-). “Edu¬
cate people’s boys,” he said, eh?
intellectual: This is a new and different age. In
this age, as the wealth, land, and property of people
without knowledge and skill slip from their fingers
with every passing day, morals and authority also get
out of hand. And even religion weakens. Therefore,
we must make an effort to educate Muslims. Mean¬
time, our holy religion has certainly made it a duty
for us to study every sort of beneficial science from
the cradle to the grave. This commandment is a com¬
mandment of Islamic law. For us Muslims, especially
in this age, two classes of learned men are required—
one of them the scholar of the spiritual, the other the
scholar of the temporal. The scholar of the spiritual
will become the prayer leader, preacher, seminary
instructor, school teacher, civil and criminal court
judge, and Muslim legal advisor, and will conduct
the religious, moral, and spiritual affairs of the popu¬
lace. Pupils who enter this class will most likely, first
of all in Turkistan and Bukhara, study the field of
religion, and of Arabic, and also a little Russian; then,
go to Mecca, Medina, Cairo, or Istanbul to complete
260 Mahmud Khoja Behbudiy
religious studies. Let them become thoroughly
learned men! (Mr. Rich dozes.) Did you understand
me, Mr. Rich?
mr. rich: (Raising his head) Yes, yes, go on talk¬
ing. You have my attention.
intellectual: In order to become scholars of the
temporal, it is imperative first of all—after having
instructed the boys in the Muslims’ writing and read¬
ing, and after having made known the requirements
of religion and the language of our own nation—for
them to attend the regular primary schools of our gov¬
ernment. That is, after their having studied and com¬
pleted high school and the primary schools of the city,
it is a must to send the boys to the universities of Pe¬
tersburg, of Moscow, to teach them medicine, law,
engineering, the field of jurisprudence, of commerce,
of agriculture, of manufacturing, of economics, of
physics, of pedagogy, and others. It is imperative to
become a real companion to the homeland and state
of Russia. And it is necessary to enter civil service, so
that the homeland and the nation of Islam may be
served according to our way of life and the needs of
our age. And, one must enter the service of the crown,
so that a benefit will be conveyed to the Muslims, and
also in order that they may become companions to the
Russian state. And the Muslim boys as well who have
studied in this manner must be sent to the universities
of Western Europe, America, and Istanbul for practi¬
cal experience. Didn’t our blessed Prophet say: “Seek
knowledge, even though it be in China!”? (Mr. Rich
asleep.) These things will not come about unless
through money and the generosity of magnates like
you. For example, the wealthy men and philanthro¬
pists of the Caucasus, Orenburg and Kazan Muslims
spend a great deal of money for knowledge, and have
their penniless boys educated. (Toward Mr. Rich:) Of
course, you have understood what I said, esteemed Mr.
Rich! Mr. Rich! Ri-i-ich!
mr. rich: (Dozes, raises head, yawns.) Yes, yes.
intellectual: At present, a bad habit we Turkistan
people have is that when a person studies Russian and
enters crown service, if he puts on an official uniform,
people censure him. Or, if a Muslim boy wears the
uniform of the regular government primary school,
they jeer. If he is a carriage driver and a manual la¬
borer, he puts on the old clothes of the Europeans,
or, being a young fellow, if he puts on a dancer’s
costume, no one will say a thing. This is the height
of stupidity and lack of knowledge about the world.
Isn’t that so, honorable Mr. Rich?!
mr. rich: (From his sitting position, leans over to
one side and slumps down.) Sn-sn-sno-snore. . ..
intellectual: O Lord God! Have mercy on the
community of Islam and especially on us
Turkistanians. (Wipes away tears with a handker¬
chief, exits.)
(Curtain falls.)
Second Act
(Tavern scene; three people sit with young Mr. Rich.)
tangriqul: Tonight, I don’t know why, the drinks
don’t affect me. Since sundown prayer I’ve emptied
a dozen bottles. The pimp’s beer didn’t touch me! Fill
’em up, let’s drink!
(Nar fills up the glasses.)
all: To Tashmurad’s health, to young Mr. Rich,
hurrah! Hurrah! Hurrah! (They drink.)
dawlat: Pals! I drank the wine, and now sweet
Liza came to my mind. O, Liza dear!
all: O Liza dear, well Liza dear, are you near?
nar: Tyrannical fate inflicted her absence on me.
In the name of God, she’s got t’ come.
dawlat: Nothing’ll come of this grumbling.
We’ll call the owner. My father died; we’ll have a
celebration.
nar: Gi’me your hand! Hey, you son of a bitch
(squeezes his hand). Fair enough!
dawlat: Hey, come on, Tangriqul! You don’t
make a sound. You go along taking in everybody’s
words. There’s a right time for a man and a right time
for a lion to act. Speak up, don’t you respect these
people? We’re also worth something. Pal! When
you’re this way, drunkenness is seriousness. Be as
happy as you can.
tangriqul: Pals! We have no secrets from you. To
tell the truth, I drank the wine. It hit me, and you said
“Liza”; now, if I’m really in this myself. I’m hot for
Liza. So ’til you bring Liza, you can’t make me talk.
But, can you really bring her, eh, Dawlat old man!
dawlat: Don’t worry about your desire. As for
Liza, this time you’ll see her by your side. If she
won’t come. I’ll kill ’er.
nar: Young Bay! Have you an itch for the young
lady?
tashmurad: Fine, go on, send somebody. Get the
party warmed up.
tangriqul: You waste a lot of time talking. If
you’re the one who gives orders, give them. Have
THE PATRICIDE 261
her come right away. Let’s have some fun. (Dawlat
rings.) (Artun, the Armenian tavernkeeper, enters.)
artun: What d’y’ say?
dawlat: Have someone go to Liza’s, so she’ll
come!
artun: In here!
dawlat: Yeh, would y’ rather bring her in this
place, or to a tomb?
artun: Beg pardon, I only asked.
dawlat: All right, all right! Send somebody!
artun: Look, you know what! Liza said to me:
“Don’t send me anyone without 15 silver rubles!” So,
gi’me fifteen silver rubles and carriage fare, too. Let’s
send Nicholas. If not Liza, let him bring someone
else. Have a good time!
dawlat: Can’t you bring her first and then get the
money?
artun: Dawlat, old man, I told y’ Liza won’t come
to me ‘til she gets advance payment, right! You know
your ownself, this infidel gal isn’t mine.
(The drinkers stare at one another in dismay, reach
into their change purses.)
tangriqul: Artun! Wait a second, we’ll give you
some money.
artun: At your service (goes out). (The pals’ ex¬
hilaration subsides; they quiet down.)
dawlat: Pour, let’s drink. (Nar fills them up.)
tangriqul: It spoiled everything when she had to
get the money ahead of time.
dawlat: If she’s stubborn, that’s the way she’ll
be. Have you any money? All of you get it out. (They
all get money out; Dawlat counts; it doesn’t add up
to five rubles.) Nothing can be done with this. A way
out has t’be found.
nar: (Mockingly) O young Mr. Rich! But what
are we beggars to you! The money doesn’t come out
of your purse. That’s young Mr. Rich’s character.
(Points with his hand.)
dawlat: Don’t worry, Nar! I thought of some¬
thing, if young Mr. Rich agrees.
tangriqul: What d’y’ mean?
dawlat: Just a minute! Before you find out what
it may be, let’s drink to young Mr. Rich’s health.
(Tangriqul pours, they drink to health of young
Mr. Rich.)
dawlat: Young Mr. Rich! Wednesday’s celebra¬
tion, like tonight’s, will either be once in a lifetime,
or it won’t; a particular night won’t be repeated a
thousand times. If it’s all right. I’ll pair you off with
Tangriqul. You’ll go together, and you’ll point out
your father’s strongbox. Tangriqul will take care of
the rest.
tashmurad (Young Mr. Rich): Tangriqul, brother,
will you go?
tangriqul: If buddies give the orders, I’ll go to
the other world, even if that’s your townhouse.
dawlat: What d’ y’ say, Nar!
nar: I’m one of the group, too. If you say so, I’ll
go.
dawlat: No, the two are enough. People mustn’t
get suspicious when they see them—tomorrow is
another day.
nar: Young Mr. Rich! Do you know where your
father’s strongbox is located?
tashmurad: In my father’s bedroom.
dawlat: How many doors does his bedroom
have?
tashmurad: Three.
dawlat: Which door will you enter by?
tashmurad: One of the doors opens from my
mother’s room. I’ll go in and open the door located
on the court side. Then brother Tangriqul will come
in.
dawlat: Good boy! You must have done some
thieving before. Nar! Fill ’em up, let’s drink! (Nar
fills them, they drink.) (Dawlat to Tangriqul and
Tashmurad:) Do you plan to go now?
tangriqul: Of course, why not go? (Dawlat gives
his pistol to young Mr. Rich. Nar takes a knife from
the leg of his boot, gives it to Tangriqul. They con¬
ceal them and stand up.)
dawlat: (Looking at the pair) Good luck, heroes!
tangriqul: So he’ll get it . . . (Dawlat takes
Tangriqul to one side, gives sign and secret informa¬
tion and instructions.)
nar: Amen, God.
all: God is great. (Dawlat gives benediction.)
(Tangriqul and Tashmurad go out.) (Dawlat and Nar
drink and sing.)
(Curtain falls.)
Third Act
(As is customary, Mr. Rich asleep on bedstead,
strongbox in one comer of the room.) (Tashmurad
enters stealthily through one door, looking this way
and that, opens another door and stands aside.)
tangriqul: (Enters, a key and an iron tool in his
hands, knife at his belt; goes to the strongbox, uses
262 Mahmud Khoja Behbudiy
key. Strongbox won’t open; he looks at Tashmurad.
With a gesture, asks what to do. Tashmurad signals
him to break open the strongbox with the iron tool.
Tangriqul breaks open strongbox with iron tool.
Mr. Rich rouses at the noise of the strongbox.)
mr. rich: (Starts up, seizes club.) Help, help (runs
toward Tangriqul).
tashmurad: (Comes and grabs the club.)
tangriqul: (Stabs Mr. Rich in armpit with knife.)
mr. rich: (Collapses and falls.) Aaah, my soul!
(Wheezes, tumbles, dies.)
tangriqul: (Lifts moneybag from strongbox;
hides knife and iron tool on himself; voices of some
people heard from outside.)
People: What’s wrong, someone cried for help.
(Mr. Rich’s wife enters with several men. They see
Tangriqul and Tashmurad.)
tangriqul: Tashmurad, shoot! (Tashmurad fires
pistol in the air, they run away, now pointing the
weapon at people who entered.)
mrs. rich: Oh, thanks to a monster, what a day this
is, help, police! (Slaps hands together, throws self on
Mr. Rich, tears her face and hair.) Ey, Tashmurad,
dead before your time! Vomit blood! If only you had
perished of smallpox. Akh, Tashmurad, the patricide.
Help, pol-i-i-ce!
mentor: (Enters.) Mother dear! For you, there is
no alternative but patience. The causes of this unhap¬
piness and calamity are backwardness and stupidity,
ignorance and lack of training. Stupidity wrecked
your home. Ignorance deprived you of home and
family. Ignorance will send your son to Siberia. The
misfortune of having no training will remove your
beloved child from your heart and make his life sepa¬
rate from you. Your boy’s father didn’t train him or
educate him. In the end, he ran into misfortune. Evil
associates led him astray, so you became a victim of
backwardness.
mrs. rich: (Writhing) Ay, oh oh my boy. O, my
master. Ah, o o o oh.
mentor: But your master turned a deaf ear to my
admonition, and in the end, a terrible thing like this
happened , Now, there is no recourse for you beyond
bitter restraint, mother dear! May God grant you
patience.
mrs. rich: (Sobs hysterically.) O, my boy. Ah, my
master. I’ve been cut off from both of them. They’ll
send my husband to the grave, my boy to Siberia. Oh
oh oh h h.
(Curtain falls.)
Fourth Scene
(The same tavern as in the second act.)
nar, dawlat: (Sit drinking and singing.)
tangriqul and tashmurad: (Enter sweating and
exhausted; hide pistol and bloody knife to one side;
taking out moneybag; throw it on the table; sit down.)
tangriqul: Bring a water pipe, hey!
artun: (Brings a water pipe; they smoke. Artun
exits.)
tangriqul: (Taking Dawlat to one side, speaks
confidentially, makes gestures.)
dawlat: (“Calmly.”) (Speaks in undertone, with
gestures; makes them quiet down.) (Opens money¬
bag, peers in, is delighted. Claps Tangriqul and
Tashmurad on the shoulder.) Good work! Good
work! (Rings bell; Artun enters.)
artun: What’ll y’ have?
dawlat: Here, take the money, get Liza right away.
artun: At your service, she’ll come at once.
(Takes money; they drink.)
liza: (Enters.) Good evenun’. (Exchanges greet¬
ings with everyone.)
dawlat: Glad y’re here, tanks, y’come.
liza: Merci. (Sits down.)
dawlat: Fill ‘em up! T’ Liza’s health!
nar: (Pours, makes bow.) To Liza’s health, hur¬
rah, hurrah. (They drink.)
dawlat, nar: (Sing a song; the sound of a whistle
comes from outside. The tramp of feet is heard. The
gathering becomes agitated, startled. Armed police¬
men, a police chief, and officers burst in.)
liza: (Runs away.)
police: (Seize the four individuals; some look for
culprits and search all around. They find the bloody
knife and pistol, and turn the pistol over to the Po¬
lice Chief. He sniffs it, examines, it, empties car¬
tridges.)
tangriqul and tashmurad: (Run off; officers seize
them.)
tashmurad: (Weeps, cries and cries, becomes
extremely agitated.)
police chief: (Makes a signal. Bringing arm fet¬
ters, they shackle Tangriqul and Tashmurad. Hands
of the other two are tied.) (Forms criminals and of¬
ficers in a line.)
mentor: (Enters; looks at criminals, shows regret.
Toward the audience:) That is the fate of backward
and untrained boys; and if their fathers had educated
them this robbery and patricide committed by them
THE PATRICIDE 263
wouldn’t have taken place; and they wouldn’t have
drunk liquor this way, and would not have incurred
blood guilt unjustly. They would not remain in Si¬
beria and in chains all of their lives, and on the Judg¬
ment Day stay in Hades. And if these people didn’t
drink liquor, they wouldn’t remain in torment and
suffering in the world, and in the Hereafter, to all
eternity. O, truly, it is ignorance which murdered
Mr. Rich and plunged these young men into an eter¬
nity of torment. It is untutoredness and backwardness
which destroyed our life and made Mr. Rich’s son
weep, without a country, exiled, expatriated; rootless¬
ness, the slavery of poverty and want, and humilia¬
tion, all are the fruit and consequence of ignorance
and untutoredness. The people who have made
progress in the world progressed by means of knowl¬
edge. When people became prisoners and wretched,
it was from ignorance. So long as we are untrained
and do not educate our children, evil events and ill
luck must continue to reign among us. There is no
way, other than studying and educating, to put an end
to these affairs. May God the most high grant others
the benefit of example and give you patience.
police chief: (Imperiously) Move along, prison,
march! (They start off.)
(Curtain falls.)
37
Abdulhamid Sulayman Cholpan
Doctor Muhammad-Yar
Abdulhamid Sulayman, writing under the pseudonym Cholpan (Uzbekistan, 1893-1938)
was one of the founders of modem Uzbek literature. As poet, playwright, novelist, and
translator, Cholpan left an indelible imprint on his cultural milieu. The son of one of the
wealthiest merchants in Andijan in the Ferghana Valley, Cholpan attended a so-called
Russian-native school. His precocious talents led him to public life when still in his teens.
He was also an active participant in the modernist reform movement in Central Asia.
After the Russian revolution of 1917, Cholpan produced his greatest work, although his
emphasis shifted much more to nationalism. He was arrested and executed in 1938, one
of the innumerable victims of Stalinist terror. The story translated here is arguably the
first piece of modern prose fiction in the Uzbek language. Serialized in a newspaper in
1914, it played an influential role in Central Asian modernism. The story is very much a
juvenile work—Cholpan was a teenager when he wrote it. Still, for all its artlessness and
its implausible plot, the story incorporates many of the central themes of modernist rheto¬
ric in Central Asia; the power of knowledge, the value of collective action, patriotism, a
fascination with cosmopolitan modernity, and an intense didacticism, 1
In a dark corner of Turkistan, in the town of—, lived
a poor, sixty-year-old barber called Haji Ahmad.
His wife had died of consumption after struggling
bravely with it for nine months. She left behind a
son called Muhammad-Yar. Haji Ahmad was known
in his town as Haji Barber, because at the age of fif¬
teen he had gone on hajj [pilgrimage to Mecca] with
his father. His father died on the hajj, and Haji
Ahmad traveled alone in Egypt, Istanbul, Fars,
Morocco, Baluchistan, Baghdad, Iran, and Afghani¬
stan, as well as in inner Russia, for 10 years before
returning home. As a result of his travels, he could
speak Persian, Arabic, Russian, and English. But
because he had suffered many hardships in his trav¬
els due to his ignorance, he energetically set about
educating his son Muhammad-Yar as soon as he
was old enough.
When Muhammad-Yar was ten, a teacher from
Russia, a graduate of the Great Seminary in Ufa, ar¬
rived in town. He had been in town only for a week
Abdulhamid Sulayman Cholpan, “Do’khtur Muhammadyor”
(Doctor Muhammad-Yar), edited by Sirojiddin Ahmad and
Ulughbek Dolimov, Sharq yulduzi (Star of the East), 1992,
number 1, pp. 132-138. First published in Sada-yi Turkistan
(The Voice of Turkistan), Tashkent, Russian Turkistan, July
4, July 25, August 10. October 26, November 5, and Novem¬
ber 12, 1914. Translation from Uzbek by Adeeb Khalid and
Ken Petersen. Introduction by Adeeb Khalid.
or two when he heard of the barber “who read news¬
papers and knew seventy-two languages,” and went
to his barbershop to meet him. Muhammad-Yar was
also there. At a sign from his father, he got up and
welcomed the teacher with the utmost respect. Haji
Ahmad and the teacher sat and talked for a long time.
During the conversation, Haji Ahmad said, “I have
only this one son. I want to educate him according
to the needs of the times. If you are willing, give him
a good national education, so that afterwards I may
have him taught in a government school.” After some
thought, the teacher accepted. Haji Ahmad closed his
shop and took the teacher to his house. The young
Muhammad-Yar studied enthusiastically with the
teacher. And he spent his spare time not at tea houses,
parties, and brothels, as uneducated boys do, but in
physical training under the guidance of a Russian
officer, and in reading useful books. In this time, he
mastered all the commands of Islam, as well as his¬
tory and geography. After a year, Haji Ahmad wanted
to send his beloved son to a government school. But
alas! He had no money. This poverty was very op-
1. Adeeb Khalid, The Politics of Muslim Cultural Re¬
form: Jadidism in Central Asia (Berkeley: University of Cali¬
fornia Press, 1998). pp. 104-105; Naim Karimov, Abdul¬
hamid Sulaymon o'ghli Cho'lpon (Abdulhamid Sulayman
Cholpan) (Tashkent, Uzbekistan: Fan, 1991).
264
DOCTOR MUHAMMAD-YAR 265
pressive and threatened to deprive the poor child of
all excellence and learning.
Having no other choice, Haji Ahmad and the
teacher went to all the notables of the city in search
of help. Some of the merchants refused them entry as
soon as they saw the teacher’s [modem] dress, while
others received them; some, seeing Muhammad-Yar’s
beauty, offered him a salary as secretary and personal
servant. However, our Haji Ahmad knew what these
men were up to and therefore refused to give his be¬
loved son to them. Poor Haji Ahmad gave up hope
of receiving any help from the rich merchants and
began to explore other avenues. At this time, nu¬
merous wedding feasts were being celebrated in the
town, 2 while gamblers and drunks knifed each other,
and human blood cried, “Ignorance! Ignorance!” as
it flowed. One after the other, all the student aid so¬
cieties had closed.
In the meantime, the teacher prepared to leave
town. At nine o’clock, Haji Ahmad went to the rail¬
way station along with his son to see the teacher off.
On the way back, they came upon gamblers fighting
over money. Haji Ahmad went up to separate them
and give them advice. One of them came up and
strangled Haji Ahmad to death, and injured
Muhammad-Yar. As he gave up his life, Haji Ahmad
looked at his son and said, “My son! Instead of a
legacy. . . I... leave... you... as security. .. study
. .. study .. . study . ..”
Muhammad-Yar decided to seek out the murder¬
ers of his father and exact revenge. But the real mur¬
derer of his father was not these men but rather ig¬
norance; so he peacefully buried his father and
resolved to struggle against ignorance. As for the
weapons in the struggle against ignorance, his father
had already told him that they were not cannons,
guns, pistols, daggers, or bows and arrows, but only
“Study! Study! Study!”
The barbaric murder of his father, and the sor¬
rows at seeing his homeland, Turkistan—which had
once created a name for itself through knowledge
and learning—swimming in a river of ignorance,
made Muhammad-Yar fall ill with tuberculosis. The
effects of the disease began to show on his face,
though it did not afflict him fully. At this time, a
big fire broke out in the town and destroyed six or
2. [Lavish celebrations were a major focus of modernist
Islamic criticism in Central Asia.—Trans.]
seven neighborhoods, leaving the Muslims hungry
on the streets. In their midst was an Armenian shop
as well, but its loss was smaller because the shop
was insured. And what of our Muslims? Our Mus¬
lims didn’t even know what insurance was. Those
who knew what it was thought it was illicit, and
therefore would have none of it. Seeing this state
of affairs, how was it possible to remain unmoved?
As he saw this state of affairs, poor Muhammad-
Yar’s illness began to worsen.
In the new city, an admonitory film called
“Drunkenness and Its Terrible Consequences” was
showing at the Admonition theater. No matter how
bad he felt, he could not stay away. He waited impa¬
tiently for the evening in order to see the conse¬
quences of this accursed drunkenness.
At last, after the evening prayer, he set off on foot
for the Admonition theater. [As the film played,] a shot
rang out from the yard of the theater. The film was
stopped and everybody ran outside. Poor, weak
Muhammad-Yar, too, was among them. What a sight!
In the yard of the city theater, drunks playing cards
had argued over a small amount of money; one of them
had taken out a handgun and shot the other. The cul¬
prit was apprehended and the injured taken to the
hospital, but he died along the way. The culprit, thor¬
oughly confused, shot himself in the theater’s yard.
Two young Muslims said goodbye to this world
due to ignorance. The horrible consequences of
drunkenness were truly on display.
Seeing this, Muhammad-Yar fainted. The police
took him to the city hospital. Muhammad-Yar had
no father, no mother, no relatives ... There was no
one to ask after him. Ah, loneliness! Ah, orphanhood!
Ah, the cause of it all: Ignorance! Go! Disappear!!
Die!!!
Muhammad-Yar got better after a month’s treat¬
ment in the hospital. As he left the hospital, the doc¬
tors recommended that he go to the Caucasus for
treatment, and that he study while there.
Muhammad-Yar told the doctors of his penni¬
lessness. The doctors consulted for a while and then
gave him a letter that entitled him to be treated in any
hospital in the Caucasus without having to pay a
kopek. Muhammad-Y ar left the hospital and went
home. There was no one there: no father, no mother
.. . What a sad sight! He rented the house to a Rus¬
sian for six months for 225 rubles, and set off, at
seven o’clock, for the railway station to see if there
was a train. But there was no train until nine the next
266 Abdulhamid Sulayman Cholpan
morning. Sadly, he went back home and became an
overnight guest in his own house.
The next morning, he was at the railway station,
waiting for the train. At last, twentieth-century civili¬
zation arrived, snorting like a dragon, spewing water
in every direction ... Muhammad-Yar was about to
leave his homeland. It was a strange sight at the sta¬
tion, as Muhammad-Yar’s heart began to break.
A Muslim had lost his bags! Another didn’t know
the name of the station he was going to and therefore
had bought a ticket for the wrong station. Confronted
with such scenes, Muhammad-Yar was left immobile.
At last, after the second whisde, he got up and began
to look for a place in the third class. The sad scenes
mentioned above were in evidence in even greater
force here. One Muslim had a bloody nose from fight¬
ing with another; another Muslim was taken away by
train officials and beaten. Muhammad-Yar was left
immobile. He left the car and, standing on one side,
began to look around. An Armenian from some dark
comer of the Caucasus had opened a shop at the sta¬
tion and had become rich. Two of his sons studied in
government schools. Local Muslims, on the other
hand, spent all their incomes on circumcisions and
funerals, and were all in conditions of poverty and
humiliation. His heart sank again; again, the nervous¬
ness ... He was absorbed in thought. The third whistle
came. The horseless carriage of the twentieth century
announced its departure and began to move noisily
forward. With that, Muhammad-Yar had left his sa¬
cred homeland and was on his way to other lands, to
see other societies. He entered the third car and began
walking around aimlessly. His head was full of wor¬
ries about Turkistan. Suddenly somebody called out,
“Muhammad-Yar!”
Muhammad-Yar looked up. It was Petr, the Rus¬
sian officer who had given him physical training.
“Where are you going?” Muhammad-Yar asked
the officer.
“I’ve been transferred to a different station on
military business. Where are you going?” he asked.
Muhammad-Yar thought for a while and then
said, “Into exile.”
“Why?”
“To study—study—study.”
“Is your father all right?”
Tears came to Muhammad-Yar’s eyes at this
question. “He’s dead,” he replied.
Hearing these words, the officer’s eyes too filled
with kind tears.
Muhammad-Yar borrowed a pair of binoculars
from the officer and went out into the corridor. The
train was marching on, spewing water onto the soil
of his homeland and attracting the attention of the
local Muslims living in the vicinity. Muhammad-
Yar stood looking at the distant mountains through
the binoculars. His eyes filled with tears and he ad¬
dressed the homeland he was leaving behind:
“O black mountains who have seen the troops of
Genghis [Khan] and [Amir] Timur [Central Asian
rulers, died 1227 and 1405]. O old mountains who
have seen the older epochs of my land Turkistan!
Tell honestly: Now you see the civilization of the
20th century too! Seeing that this stallion of 20th-
century civilization can cover a three-day journey
in 10 hours, why do my compatriots stand around
with their mouths agape? Why don’t they do any¬
thing to enter this civilization? How long will they
keep these two-wheeled carts that don’t belong on
the streets?
“O compatriots! How long this ignorance? Why
this heedlessness? After all, you too are human be¬
ings! Act like human beings! Why don’t you make
use of the fruits of knowledge and education that you
see before you? Why don’t you participate in these
things? Awake from your sleep. Struggle! Seek out
knowledge, education, skills! The time has come—
indeed, it is past!”
At seven in the evening, the officer and
Muhammad-Yar parted, and Muhammad-Yar went
to his place and fell asleep.
A few days later, Muhammad-Yar found himself
at the great railway station of Baku. With his bundle
and other things in his hand, he quickly descended
from the train and took a carriage to the city center.
The city of Baku, famous for its Muslim millionaires,
wealthy Muslim merchants, many Turkic societies,
and charitable funds worth millions, seemed wonder¬
ful to Muhammad-Yar. He went to the offices of the
city’s premier newspaper. The Caucasus, a 10-page
daily which circulated in every Muslim city. He ex¬
plained his circumstances in detail to the editor, who
replied, “I’ll seek a solution.”
Muhammad-Yar left the offices to see the city.
That night he spent in a hotel called “The Caspian
Sea,” which had been built according to Eastern ar¬
chitectural traditions by one of the city’s [Muslim]
millionaires. In the morning, he bought a copy of The
Caucasus from a famous bookstore. At the top, he
saw the following announcement:
DOCTOR MUHAMMAD-YAR 267
announcement: From the Muslim Benevolent
Society: We wish to send Muhammad-Yar, a 14-
year-old coreligionist who has come here in search
of knowledge from our neighbor Turkistan, to a
government school at our expense. There will be a
meeting of the Benevolent Society on this matter at
7:30 this evening. All the esteemed members must
gather punctually at this time. Mr. Muhammad-Yar
should also be present. Respectfully, The Director.
At half past seven that evening, after some dis¬
cussion among members, the Society decided to give
Muhammad-Yar a scholarship on condition that he
lecture in Baku and its environs for two years after
completing his studies. Muhammad-Yar had struck
good fortune indeed. From here on, he would be able
to reap the fruits of all the struggles he had endured.
He was ready to serve his homeland and his nation
with his body and soul.
Muhammad-Yar, who had received no aid in his
own land from his compatriots, had achieved his
hopes through the efforts of the youths of Baku.
That is, he entered the city school, achieving his
most sacred goal. Now he would serve his home¬
land and the compatriots who had humiliated him.
Muhammad-Yar thought about his land and his place,
and it made him cry.
One evening, he was reading a newspaper on a
bench in the city park when he saw the headline,
“The First Theater Performance in Turkistan.”
When he finished reading the story, he could hardly
sit still, and began to jump for joy. Meanwhile, one
of his friends among the young journalists of Baku
had appeared and was startled at his jumping. He
caught him by the shirt-tail, sat him down on the
bench, and asked, “Muhammad-Yar! Why are you
so happy?”
Muhammad-Yar could only say, “The first theater
p .. . p ... performance in T... Tur.. . kis . .. stan.”
The Baku journalist sat for a while, then got up and
left. When Muhammad-Yar looked at the time, it was
midnight. Nobody was left in the park, so
Muhammad-Yar also stood up and left.
As exams approached, Muhammad-Yar worked
day and night. At last, the exam came. Muhammad-
Yar stood first among his classmates. Because of his
unstinting labors, Muhammad-Yar began to show
signs of illness again. On his doctors’ recommenda¬
tion, he went to the waters of Borzhum for a month
of treatment.
Now, again with the help of the same benevolent
society, Muhammad-Yar entered the Baku gimnazia
[Russian school]. He loved his lessons so much that
he didn’t leave school, even on holidays. Hours
passed, then days, then years. The time eventually
came for Muhammad-Yar to leave the gimnaziia
as well. At last, it was time for his final exams.
Muhammad-Yar stood first again and won a gold
medal for his efforts. Muhammad-Yar entered the
medical faculty of Petrograd University—again with
the help of the Benevolent Society and the efforts of
the Baku merchants. In his second year there, he wrote
Students for Life, a novel based on the lives of madrasa
[traditional-school] students in his native Turkistan.
It had twelve chapters—no novel of this size had ever
appeared about national life in Turkistan. The novel
was even translated into Russian and published by a
Russian journal in Petrograd. This novel was so well
written that nobody—even if they spent forty to fifty
years in a madrasa —could have better described the
madrasa students and how they spent all their time
hanging around samovars instead of studying. A year
before he finished his studies at the university, he
wrote Guests of the Capital, a play about Turkistani
merchants in Moscow and Petrograd. This play
showed with consummate expertise the insults suf¬
fered by uneducated merchants in the hotels of the
capitals, simply because of their ignorance of language
and science. This book Muhammad-Yar translated into
Russian himself and published. Along with some
friends, Muhammad-Yar staged the story as a play in
Petrograd to support themselves. Muhammad-Yar
played the lead role himself and received much ap¬
plause. After expenses, the players were left with 3,000
rubles for themselves.
Finally, exam time came. Muhammad-Yar stood
first yet again, and received his doctor’s diploma. But
still he did not return home. With the help of the
philanthropic merchants of Baku and his own money
earned from the theater, this Turkistani student went
to Switzerland to gain practical experience in Swiss
universities.
All his school friends were present at the railway
station to see him off on the evening train. A poor
Turkistani boy, having finished Russian schools
through his hard work and energy, was on his way
to study in one of the most advanced countries of
Europe.
Here then was the fruit of his labor, the fruit of
his hard work, the harvest yielded by his efforts. May
268 Abdulhamid Sulayman Cholpan
this be an example ... an example ... an example
. . . Such are the benefits of benevolent societies, the
product of solidarity, the fruits of unity ...
Our Turkistani child reached the capital of Swit¬
zerland on the “stallion of civilization,” and enrolled
as an auditor in the medical faculty of the university.
The poor student spent seven years in Switzerland,
enduring good times and bad with patience and stead¬
fastness. At last, he left Switzerland. Traveling
through the lands of Italy, Turkey, Rumania, and
Bulgaria, he reached Odessa, and then Baku.
All the young intellectuals of Baku were present
at the railway station to receive Muhammad-Yar, their
“spiritual father,” and gave him a banquet with fifty
or sixty people in attendance. He taught in the Mus¬
lim medical courses that had begun in Baku three years
before and then got ready to return to his homeland,
Turkistan. Having taken leave of his mentor in Baku,
he asked his advice of helping his homeland, which
seemed to be swimming in a sea of ignorance. When
his mentor gave his permission, all the young intel¬
lectuals of Baku came to see him off at the steamer
docks in the evening. His mentor gave him a gold
watch with the inscription, “Souvenir of Baku.” Those
present asked for a brief speech. Muhammad-Yar gave
a short speech from the deck. The audience applauded
him loudly and began tossing flowers at him. Finally,
the steamer gave a whistle and, ruffling the waters of
the sea, set off toward Turkistan.
Muhammad-Yar’s speech given from the deck of
the steamer was as follows:
“O spiritual brothers! And O spiritual fathers! I
was a poor student who came to your city in search
of knowledge and education from the darkest comer
of Turkistan. With the national effort of your zeal¬
ous inhabitants, I followed education through Rus¬
sian universities all the way to European ones. In
reality, this is all the fruit of benevolent societies and
publishing companies. I too will roll up my sleeves
to help my land and work to awaken my brothers who
are left behind in ignorance. I sincerely thank my
spiritual home Baku, and you, my spiritual parents,
and acknowledge your help in awakening us
Turkistanis, who are like dragon fish in the river of
ignorance, and helping us find the path.” At this
point, the steamer began to move slowly. “Be well,
my fathers and brothers!” he finished.
The mechanical fish, splitting the water, was
bringing a servant to his homeland. At last he
alighted in a savage place and mounted the “stallion
of civilization.” Where were the seas and waters with
their delicate breezes? Where were the beauties of the
Alps that he had seen a few years earlier in Switzer¬
land, France, and Italy? Where were the Swiss vil¬
lages built atop the Alps, where they spend their earn¬
ings in educating their beloved children, and not on
feasts, uloq , 3 dancing boys, or providing embroidered
clothes for noblemen, mullas [religious teachers], and
other fat-bellied types? Now they were all gone! In
their place were low buildings made of thatch and
mud, and the Muslims living in them in an orphaned
state! The Uzbeks, Kazaks, Turkmens, and other
Muslims, having spent their incomes on dancing
boys, uloq, and drink, or on providing expensive
garments and brocades for teachers, noblemen, and
the wealthy, had become slaves to their landlords.
Ah! Ah! Ah! Muhammad-Yar, who had seen
progress and civilization and who knew all, was
deeply affected at seeing this baseness in his own
nation, among his own people. Sometimes tears
flowed from his eyes. On top of it all, inside the train,
disorderly Muslims slept noisily and were beaten
by the conductors for having lost their tickets.
Muhammad-Yar couldn’t stand it any longer. He
went to the corridor and stared with tear-filled eyes
at the majestic mountains visible in the distance—
historic mountains which in the times of his ances¬
tors had borne huge forts—and the peaks, rivers,
forests, and sands. The beautiful scenes, the distant,
tall, green mountains, were no less than in Switzer¬
land. The water flowing in the rivers and the fertile
land that gave to whomever sowed it—they were in
no way inferior to America. Because of uneducated
merchants, ignorant “scholars,” false noblemen, and
wastefulness, it resembled nothing. Even the Chinese
were not so lazy!
How wonderful would it be if the people under¬
stood what was good for them—if they opened na¬
tional schools and colleges, sent their children to
European universities, and produced doctors, law¬
yers, journalists, skilled merchants and engineers—
and if each one of them stuck to his duties and looked
out for the good of our people. Such were his
thoughts. But he couldn't believe this could happen.
The farther we go, the farther behind we seem to fall.
3. [Uloq is a traditional game akin to polo, in which com¬
petitors struggle for the possession of the carcass of a sheep.
It was accompanied by carnivalesque celebration and bet¬
ting.—Trans.]
DOCTOR MUHAMMAD-YAR 269
No, no! If intellectuals like Muhammad-Yar
began to appear in every town in ones or twos, that
would almost be enough. Muhammad-Yar’s head
was filled with many thoughts all the way to his
town.
His town approached. Since he had left, five or
ten intellectuals had emerged in his town too. They
welcomed him. They got into a carriage and set off
for the old city. There were all sorts of changes in
the Russian part of town: new hotels, houses, parks,
shops, theaters, schools; the streets were paved, the
alleys wide, the electric lamps resembled Switzer¬
land! The part of town where Muslims lived, how¬
ever, was exactly the same. More grief....
Muhammad-Yar got down in front of his own house.
It had been redone in the European manner by the
Russian who had rented it from Muhammad-Yar for
225 rubles for six months. Muhammad-Yar saw him
and introduced himself in Russian.
The Russian said, “I rented it from you for six
months. No one appeared after six months, or a year.
In the third year, I built this. It cost 5 or 10 thousand
rubles. But three years ago, I finished recovering all
the money. In the last three years, I made 9,000 rubles
from 3,000. I’ll vacate your place quickly and also
give you 5,000 rubles. Please forgive the rest.”
[Muhammad-Yar said:] “If you don’t have a
place, stay here. I only need two rooms here.”
“I have another nice place. I’ll move there. I
would have given you 9,000 rubles, but 4,000 went
for improvements.”
Muhammad-Yar happily accepted. The next
morning, the Russian vacated the house and gave
Muhammad-Yar 5,000 rubles. Muhammad-Yar began
to live happily in the spacious place. He rented out
the shops below the house and, with the permission
of the government, opened a private clinic upstairs
and began treating patients—the wealthy for a fee,
the poor for free. He made fifty to sixty rubles every
day from his practice alone.
He bought a small plot in a village. Because of
Muhammad-Yar’s effort and God-given luck, he
struck oil. Now millionaires came to Muhammad-Yar
to work with him. On one hand, he started his own
business; on the other, he gathered the few intellec¬
tuals in town and opened a benevolent society to
which he gave a lot of money. A reading room
opened in the city. This year, Muhammad-Yar began
publishing an illustrated weekly called Homeland
and a daily newspaper called News. When he raised
the issue of vocational schools, many opponents
emerged, so in its place he started summer courses
for teachers where they were given lectures on the
principles of education. Thus houses of learning
began to proliferate in a small town, which became
a model for others. The Turco-Tatar press began call¬
ing Muhammad-Yar “Doctor Muhammad-Yar, Ser¬
vant of the Nation.”
This page intentionally left blank
SECTION 5
South Asia
This page intentionally left blank
38
Khwaja Altaf Hussein Hali
The Flow and Ebb of Islam
Khwaja Altaf Hussein Hali (North India, 1837-1914) was a pioneer in modem Urdu poetry.
He came from a learned family in Panipat, United Provinces, and ran away to Delhi to
pursue his studies, He was forced to return home and get married, then ran away again
to pursue higher education, While working at the Punjab government book depot in
Lahore, revising translations from English into Urdu, he developed an interest in English
poetry and Western literary criticism. This interest led him to show his own verses to
well-known poets of the era, Ghalib (1797-1869) and Shaifta (died 1869), who encour¬
aged and sponsored him as he explored modem, humanistic themes, rather than ro¬
mantic stock images that were popular at the time. Symptomatic of his altered mentality
was the change of his pen name, from Khasta (distressed, exhausted) to Hali (modem,
up-to-date). As both a poet and literary critic of great influence—his discussion of po¬
etry prefacing his own collected poems is a classic—Hali evolved new styles of Urdu
expression, Like many other Indian modernists of the era, Hali came into the sphere of
Sir Sayyid Ahmad Khan (see chapter 40), for whose journal Hali wrote the long poem
Musaddas, which is excerpted here. (The term "Musaddas" refers to the format of six
lines per stanza.) The poem nostalgically laments Muslim decline, but also offers a mes¬
sage of hope and reform. It is the pioneering work in a genre emerging in Urdu that
combined ethical and political themes with a strong Islamic orientation, 1
The State of the Religion of Islam
But as for that dilapidated hall of the true religion,
whose pillars have been tottering for ages,
Which will remain in the world only a few days
more, and which the Muslims will not find
again for all their searching,
Our noble friends have withdrawn their
attention from it. The only guardian of the
building is God.
The Lack of Holy Men
All the Sufi sanctuaries lie in ruins, those
places of hope for the poor man and the king,
Khwaja Altaf Hussein Hali, Halt’s Musaddas: The Flow and
Ebb of Islam, translated from Urdu by Christopher Shackle
and Javed Majeed (Delhi, India: Oxford University Press,
1997), pp. 167-177. First published in 1879. Introduction by
Marcia K. Hermansen.
1. Aziz Ahmad, “Hali, Khwaja Altaf Hussain,” in Bernard
Lewis et alia, editors, Encyclopedia of Islam, 2d ed. (Leiden,
Netherlands: E. J. Brill; London: Luzac, 1971), volume 3,
Where the paths of esoteric knowledge were open,
on which the glances of the angels used to fall.
Where are those snares of divine longing?
Where are those holy men of God?
The Lack of Religious Experts
Where are those masters of the science of the
Holy Law? Where are those expounders of
religious Traditions?
Where are those fundamentalists and controver¬
sialists, where are those teachers of hadith
[narratives of the Prophet] and Qur'anic
interpretation?
In the assembly which was brilliantly lit
throughout yesterday, the lamp does not even
flicker anywhere now.
pp. 93-94; Gail Minault, Voices of Silence (Delhi. India: Cha-
nakya Publications, 1986); Frances W. Pritchett, Nets of Aware¬
ness: Urdu Poetry and Its Critics (Berkeley: University of Cali¬
fornia Press, 1994): Laurel Steele, “Hali and his Muqaddamah:
The Creation of a Literary Attitude in Nineteenth Century India,”
Annual of Urdu Studies, volume 1, 1981, pp. 1—45.
273
274 Khwaja Altaf Hussein Hali
Where are those schools of instruction in the
faith? Where are those stages of knowledge
and certitude?
Where are those pillars of the firmly fixed
Law? Where are those heirs of the trusty
Apostle?
The Community has no refuge of asylum left,
no judge or jurisconsult, no mystic or
theologian.
The Lack of Religious Books
Where are those archives of religious books?
Where are those manifestations of divine
science?
Such a cold wind has blown upon this festive
gathering that the torches of divine light are
utterly extinguished.
No furnishings nor company are left, no flask
or instrument, no musician or cupbearer.
Those Who Claim Knowledge
Many people, making themselves out to be
well-wishers of the Community, and getting
the ignorant to acknowledge their excellence,
Keep continually going round from village to
village in turn, accumulating wealth.
These are the ones who are now acknowledged
as the leaders of Islam, these are the one who
now have the title of “heirs to the Prophet.”
Those Who Claim to be Holy
Many people make themselves out to the
descendants of pirs [Sufi masters], without
having any excellence in their noble selves.
They take great pride merely in the fact that
their ancestors were the favorites of God.
As they go about, they work false wonders.
They eat by robbing their disciples.
These are the ones who journey on the mystic
way, whose station lies beyond the Holy
Law.
It is with them that revelation and the power of
miracles reach their apogee today.
It is in their power that the fate of God’s
creatures lies.
It is these who are the objects of devotion now,
and these are their disciples.
These are the Junayds, these are the Bayazids now. 2
Contemporary Theologians
To make speeches through which hate may be
inflamed, to compose writings through which
hearts may be wounded,
To despise God’s sinful creatures, to brand
their Muslim brothers infidels,
This is the way of our theologians, this is the
method of our guides.
If someone goes to ask them about a problem,
he will come away with a heavy burden laid
upon him.
If, unfortunately, he has some doubt about the
matter, he will certainly be branded with the
title of “damned.”
If he openly utters an objection, it will be
difficult for him to get away from there
unharmed.
Sometimes they make the veins in their neck
swell, sometimes they foam at the mouth.
Sometimes they call him “pig” and “dog,”
sometimes they raise their staff to strike him.
They (may the evil eye be far!) are the pillars of
our religion. They are the exemplars of the
gentleness of the trusted Apostle.
If a man wishes to be happy in their company,
it is a necessary condition that he be a
Muslim by community,
That he should have the mark of prostration
clearly visible upon his forehead, that there
should be no shortcoming in his observance
of the Law,
That his mustaches should not be too long, nor
his beard curled back, nor his trousers be cut
beyond their proper length.
2. [Junayd al-Baghdadi (Arabia, 10th century), Shaykh
Junayd (Iran, 15th century), Abu Yazid Bayazid al-Bastami
(Iran, 9th century), and Pir Roshan Bayazid Ansari (South
Asia, 16th century) were influential mystics.—Ed.]
THE FLOW AND EBB OF ISLAM 275
That in all matters of belief he should be of the
same opinion as "His Reverence,” that he
should speak with the same voice on every
principle and point of the Law,
That he should be most suspicious of his
master’s opponents, and utter the most
fulsome praises of his disciples.
If he is not like this, he is an outcast from his
religion, unfit to associate with its revered
elders.
The commands of the Holy Law were so
agreeable that Jews and Christians were filled
with love for them.
The entire Qur'an is witness to their mildness.
The Prophet himself proclaimed, “Religion is
easy.”
But here they have made them so difficult that
believers have come to consider them a
burden.
They have given believers no guidance in
morality, nor produced purity in their hearts.
But they have so increased external command¬
ments that there is no escaping them even for
a moment.
They have turned the religion which was the
spring from which virtuous gentleness
flowed into the dirty water left from bathing
and ablutions.
In their hearts they continually bear hostility
toward those who truly inquire, thinking that
by relying upon the Traditions the Faith is
injured.
The whole basis of their practice lies in their
fatwas [rulings]. Their every opinion is an
excellent substitute for the Qur’an.
Only the name of the Book and the Prophet’s
example remain. They have no further use for
God and the Prophet.
Where Traditions differ among themselves, we
are never content with the straightforward
Tradition.
We consider the one which reason would never
regard as sound to be superior to every other
Tradition.
Whether great or small, all are caught up in
this, so weighed down has our understanding
become.
Polytheism and Claims to Monotheism
If a non-Muslim worships idols, he is an
infidel. Whoever attributes a son to God is an
infidel.
If someone bows down before fire as an act of
prostration, he is an infidel. If someone
believes in the power of the stars, he is an
infidel.
If for believers all paths are open— let them
worship with enthusiasm whatever they please.
Let those who so please turn the Prophet into
God. Let them exalt the imams [founders of
legal schools] above the Prophet in rank.
Let them make offerings day and night at
shrines. Let them keep going to offer their
prayers to the martyrs.
Not the slightest injury will result to the belief
in God’s oneness. Their Islam will not be
spoilt nor their faith leave them.
That religion, by which monotheism was spread
throughout the world, by which the truth was
made gloriously manifest in space and time,
In which no trace of polytheism, superstition or
idle fancy was left, that religion was changed
when it came to India.
That upon which Islam had always prided
itself, even that treasure was finally thrown
away by the Muslims.
Bigotry
Bigotry, which is the foe of humankind, which
has been the ruin of hundreds of prosperous
homes,
Which broke up Nimrod's [legendary Biblical
figure] merry feast, which offered Pharaoh
[the Egyptian ruler] up to the storm,
By whose ferment Abu Lahab [early enemy of
Islam] was destroyed, and which sank the
fleet of Abu Jahl [another early enemy of
Islam],
Appears here in a strange guise, under cover of
which its harmful effect is concealed.
The cup which is entirely filled with poison
appears to us to be the Water of Eternal Life.
276 Khwaja Altaf Hussein Hali
We think bigotry to be a part of faith, and hell
to be the highest heaven.
This is the teaching our preachers have given
us: “No matter what task there be, religious
or worldly,
It is bad to perform it in imitation of one’s
opponent.” The mark of the real spirit of the
True Faith is simply this:
“Think of everything in the opposite way to
your opponent. Think of whatever he calls
night as day.
“If you find his steps set on the straight road,
then go off on a diversion from the direct
route.
Endure whatever obstacles you may encounter
upon it. No matter how much you suffer, let
yourselves stumble on it.
If his craft gets safely out of the whirlpool,
push your boat right into it.
“If your features are hideously transmogrified,
if your conduct comes to resemble that of
beasts,
If your nature completely alters, if your
condition is utterly ruined,
Then consider that this too is a manifestation of
God, that this too is a reflection of the light
of faith.
“In manners no one resembles you, none can
surpass you in morality.
No one can attain this same enjoyment in their
food, nor discover the same elegance in
dress.
In every branch of learning your attainments
are plain. Even in your ignorance there is a
certain grace.
“Do not think that anything of yours is bad. Go
on loudly proclaiming what you have to say.
Since you stand in defense of Islam, you are
free from any evil or sin.
Evil does not cause believers to suffer harm. Your
sins are the same as the obedience of others.
“If you speak of your enemy, then mention him
with vilification and abuse.
Never give ground unwittingly in this matter.
You will see its results on the Day of
Judgment.
It is as if you were freed from sins when you
curse your adversaries.”
When there is no love between Sunni and Shi‘a
[two major sects of Islam], no sense of
community between Numani and Shaffi [two
legal schools in Sunni Islam],
No abatement of the hatred between Wahhabi
[scripturalists] and Sufi [mystics], and when
the Traditionalist curses his opponent,
There is such civil war being waged by the
people of the qibla Ithe direction of prayer]
that the whole world laughs at God’s religion.
If anyone sets himself to the task of reform,
consider him to be worse than Satan.
The path of anyone who seeks benefit from
such a trouble-maker must have diverged
from God.
Both destroy the Holy Law, and both, master
and pupil, are accursed.
39
Chiragh ‘Ali
The Proposed Political, Legal, and
Social Reforms
Chiragh 'Ali (North India, 1844-1895), a staunch supporter of Sayyid Ahmad Khan (chap¬
ter 40), was the Aligarh movement’s most outspoken critic of traditional Islamic scholar¬
ship and legal stagnation. Of Kashmiri background, he grew up in North India. After his
father died young, Chiragh 'Ali’s family responsibilities, along with the turbulent events of
the 1857 uprising, prevented him from pursuing formal higher education. Still, he was
able to find work with the colonial regime in various revenue and judicial positions, In
I 877, with the recommendation of Sir Sayyid, he entered the administration of the Nizam
of Hyderabad, where he rose to the position of finance secretary, Chiragh 'Ali's writings
often refuted missionary and Orientalist criticisms of Islam as being hostile to reason and
incapable of reform, He argued, rather, that the Islamic legal system and schools were
human institutions capable of modification. His position was that while the Qur’an taught
religious doctrine and rules for morality, it did not support a detailed code of immutable
civil law or dictate a specific political system. In his English-language writings, such as the
passage that follows—and in his Urdu articles, many published in Sir Sayyid’s journal,
Tahdhib al-Akhlaq (Cultivation of Morals )—Chiragh 'Ali espoused a variety of modernist
positions, including the importance of girls' education, His arguments on interpretation
of hadith (narratives of the Prophet) and the possibility of ijtihad (rational interpretation)
drew on the writings of Shah Wali Allah al-Dihlawi (Indian religious scholar, 1703-1762),
a precursor to modernist Islamic thought in South Asia.
“Let there be people among you who shall invite to
good, and bid what is reasonable, and forbid what
is wrong; these are the prosperous.” (The Qur’an,
Sura 3, Verse 100)
and are now published for the information of those
European and Anglo-Indian writers who, I am sorry
to remark, suffer under a delusion that Islam is inca¬
pable of any political, legal, or social reforms.
Introductory
The following pages were written on the perusal of
an article entitled “Are Reforms Possible under
Mussulman Rule?” by the Reverend Mr. Malcolm
MacColl [1831-1907] in the Contemporary Review
of August 1881, in the last quarter of the same year,
Moulavi Cheragh Ali, The Proposed Political, Legal, and
Social Reforms in the Ottoman Empire and Other Moham-
madan States (Bombay, India: Printed at the Education
Society’s Press, Byculla, 1883), pp. i-lx. Introduction by
Marcia K. Hermansen.
1, Munawwar Husain, Maulavi Chiragh 'Ali ki 'Ilmi
Khidmat (The Intellectual Contribution of Maulavi Chiragh
‘Ali) (Patna, India: Khuda Bakhsh Library, 1997); Peter
The British Empire,
the Greatest Muhammadan Power
It is very unbecoming of English writers to be so ill-
informed on a topic of vital interest to England. The
British Empire is the greatest Muhammadan Power
in the world, that is, the Queen of England, as Em¬
press of India, rules over more Muhammadans than
Hardy, Muslims of British India (Cambridge. England: Cam¬
bridge University Press, 1972), pp. 111-114; Aziz Ahmad.
Islamic Modernism in India and Pakistan, 1857-1964 (New
York: Oxford University Press, 1967), pp. 57-64; Gail
Minault, “Chiragh ‘Ali,” in John L. Esposito, ed., Oxford
Encyclopedia of the Modem Islamic World (New York: Ox¬
ford University Press, 1995), volume 1, pp. 278-279.
277
278 Chiragh ‘Ali
any sovereign, not excepting His Imperial Majesty
the [Ottoman] Sultan of Turkey. 2
European Knowledge of Muhammadanism
Always Superficial
The ideas that Islam is essentially rigid and inac¬
cessible to change; that its laws, religious, politi¬
cal and social, are based on a set of specific precepts
which can neither be added to, nor taken from, nor
modified to suit altered circumstances; that its po¬
litical system is theocratic; and that in short the Is¬
lamic code of law is unalterable and unchangeable,
have taken a firm hold of the European mind, which
is never at any trouble to be enlightened on the sub¬
ject. The writers of Europe do not deeply search the
foundations of Islam, in consequence of which their
knowledge is not only superficial in the highest de¬
gree, but is often based on unreliable sources.
Islam Capable of Moral and
Social Progress
I have endeavored to show in this book that Muham¬
madanism as taught by Muhammad, the Arabian
Prophet, possesses sufficient elasticity to enable it to
adapt itself to the social and political revolutions
going on around it. The Muhammadan Common
Law, or shari ‘a, if it can be called a Common Law,
as it does not contain any Statute Law, is by no means
unchangeable or unalterable. The only law of Mu¬
hammad or Islam is the Qur’ an, and only the Qur’ an,
which in comparison with the Muhammadan Com¬
mon Law the Rev. MacColl himself admits to be a
code of purity and mercy. 3
Republican Character of the Muslim Law
The Muhammadan states are not theocratic in their
system of government, and the Muhammadan law
being based on the principles of democracy is on
2. The number of Muhammadans in British India is esti¬
mated at 45,000,000, while there are only 16,168,000 Mu¬
hammadans of the Sultan in Europe, Asia, and Africa.
3. Reverend Mr. MacColl, “The Christian Subjects of the
Porte,” Contemporary Review, November 1876, p. 986.
this account a great check on Muslim tyrants. The
first four or five caliphates [reigns of successors to
Muhammad] were purely republican in all their fea¬
tures. The law, when originally framed, did not rec¬
ognize the existence of a king, of a nobility, or even
of a gentry in the sense in which the term was at first
understood. The position of the early caliphs and
their authority might be compared to that of the
dictators of the ancient Republic of Rome, each
successor being chosen from amongst the people by
common consent. The government of Turkey does
not and cannot claim or profess to be theocratic, as
Mr. MacColl tries to prove. 4 Sir Henry Elliot [1817—
1907], the British Ambassador at Constantinople,
writes in his Dispatch of the 25th May 1876 regard¬
ing the softas [seminary students], “Texts from the
Qur’an are circulated with a view to proving to the
faithful that the form of government sanctioned by
it is properly democratic.”
The Several Schools of
Muhammadan Jurisprudence
There have been several churches, or schools of ju¬
risprudence, developed in accordance with the social
and political changes going on around the Muham¬
madan world, with a view of adapting the law still
further to the progressive needs and altered circum¬
stances of the Muslim. But none of these schools was
final, all of them being decidedly progressive; they
were merely halting stages in the march of Muham¬
madan legislation.
The following are the founders of the schools of
interpretation or the system of jurisprudence called
madhhab :
Names of Founders (Dates of Death)
1. ‘Abdullah Ibn Mas‘ud (32 a.h.) [companion of
the Prophet, died 652-653 a.d.]
2. ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar [ibn al-Khattab] (73 a.h.)
[companion of the Prophet, died 693 a.d.]
3. ‘A’isha [bint Abi Bakr], the widow of the
Prophet (58 a.h.) [678 a.d.]
4. Mujahid [ibn Jabr al-Makki] (between 100 and
104 a.h.) [718-722 a.d.]
5. ‘Umar ibn ‘Abd al-‘Aziz (101 a.h.) [720 a.d.]
4. Ibidem, p. 977.
THE PROPOSED POLITICAL, LEGAL, AND SOCIAL REFORMS 279
6. Al-Sha‘bi (103 or 104 a.h.) [728 a.d.]
7. ‘Ata’ [ibn Abi Rabah] (115 a.h.) [733 a.d.]
8. [Abu Muhammad Sulayman] al-A‘mash (147
or 149 a.h.) [circa 765 a.d.]
9. Imam Abu Hanifa (150 a.h.) [767 a.d.]
10. [Abu ‘Amr ‘Abd al-Rahman] al-Awza’i
(157 a.h.) [774 a.d.]
11. Sufyan al-Thawri (161 a.h.) [778 a.d.]
12. Imam Layth [ibn Sa‘d] (175 a.h.) [791 a.d.]
13. Imam Malik [ibn Anas] (179 a.h.) [796 a.d.]
14. Sufyan ibn 'Uyayna (196 a.h.) [811 a.d.]
15. Imam [Abu ‘Abdullah Muhammad] al-Shafi‘i
(204 a.h.) [820 a.d.]
16. Ishaq Abu Ya'qub Ibn Rahwayh (238 a.h.)
[853 a.d.]
17. Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (241 a.h.) [855 a.d.]
18. Imam Dawud Abu Sulayman al-Zahiri (270 a.h.)
[884 a.d.]
19. Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari (310 a.h.)
[923 a.d.]
The Change in Modern Circumstances
Requires a Change in the Law
It might be supposed that as the growing needs of the
Muslim Empire led to the formation of the several
schools of jurisprudence, the various systems of in¬
terpretation of the Qur’an, and the different methods
of testing and accepting the authority of the oral tra¬
ditions; so now the requirements of modern social
and political life, as well as the change of circum¬
stances, as is to be perceived in Turkey and India,
might be met by a new system of analogical reason¬
ings and strict adherence to the principles of the
Qur’an hitherto not regarded as the sole and all-suf¬
ficient guide. Legislation is a science experimental
and inductive, not logical and deductive. The differ¬
ences of climate, character, or history must be ob¬
served; the wants and wishes of men, their social and
political circumstances must be taken into consider¬
ation, as it was done in the various stages of the first
days of the growing Muslim Empire.
The Several Schools of Jurisprudence
Based on the Above Principles
All the four mujtahids, or founders of the schools of
Muhammadan jurisprudence now in force, and oth¬
ers whose schools have now become extinct, had
adhered to the principles above referred to, which
were moreover local in their applications, and hence
could not be binding either on the Muhammadans of
India or those of Turkey.
Mr. Sell Quoted
The Reverend Mr. Edward Sell [1839-1932] writes:
“The orthodox belief is, that since the time of the four
imams [leaders; namely, Malik, Abu Hanifa, Ibn
Hanbal, and Shafi'i, founders of the four major Sunni
madhhabs] there has been no mujtahid who could do
as they did. If circumstances should arise which ab¬
solutely require some decision to be arrived at, it
must be given in full accordance with the madhhab ,
or school of interpretation, to which the person fram¬
ing the decision belongs. This effectually prevents
all change, and by excluding innovation, whether
good or bad, keeps Islam stationary.” 5
Changes Not Prevented
There is no legal or religious authority for such an
orthodox belief, or rather misbelief, nor can it be
binding on Muslims in general. In the first place, the
founders of the four schools of jurisprudence never
claimed any authority for their system or legal deci¬
sions as being final. They could not dare do so. They
were very far from imposing their analogical deduc¬
tions or private judgments on their contemporaries,
much less of making their system binding on the
future generation of the wide-spreading Muslim
Empire. In the second place, none of the mujtahids 6
or muhaddiths [scholars of hadith, sayings of the
Prophet] would accord such a high position to any
of the four imams or doctors of jurisprudence.
Muqallids
Muqallids 1 (those who follow blindly any of the four
doctors or schools of jurisprudence, without having
5. The Reverend E. Sell, Fellow of the University of
Madras, The Faith of Islam (1880), p. 23.
6. “Mujtahid is derived from jahd, same as jihad [holy
struggle], meaning making efforts of mind to attain the right
solution of legal questions.
7. The word is derived from taqlid, which means to put
a collar round the neck.
280 Chiragh 'Ali
any opinion, insight, discretion, or knowledge of
their own) only entertain the belief that since the time
of the four nmjtahids there has been no other
mujtahid who can found a school of analogical de¬
ductions or a system of interpretation; they say, “we
are shut up to following the four imams,” and “to
follow any other than the four imams is unlawful,”
as quoted by Mr. Sell from Nihayat al-murad [The
Ultimate Purpose, by ‘Abd al-Ghani Nabulusi,
1641-1731] and Tafsir-i Ahmadi [The Ahmadi Exe¬
gesis, by Shaykh Ahmad Mulla Jivan, 1637-1717],
Both these books have been the productions of the
worst of muqallids. Mr. Sell, without taking notice,
perhaps, of the distinction between mujtahids and
muqallids, quotes from the latter to show the author¬
ity of the four imams, and at the same time the final¬
ity of their system of legislation and polity to be bind¬
ing on the whole of the Muhammadan world, the
non-muqallids, the mujtahids, and the scholars of
hadith. No regard is, however, to be paid to the opin¬
ions and theories of the muqallids.
Ijtihad (Elaboration of New Ideas)
Not Extinct
The Hanbali school of jurisprudence, one of the four
so-called orthodox systems, very emphatically as¬
serts that there should be a mujtahid in each age. Now
the muqallids consider the ijtihad (the state of being
a mujtahid) to have become extinct since the four
imams, and will not believe in the possibility of the
appearance of any more mujtahids ; and their advo¬
cate, Mr. Sell, will be very much perplexed to dis¬
cover the mistake of their delusive theory.
Bahr Al-'Ulum Quoted
I will, here, refer Mr. Sell to Maulavi ‘Abd al-‘Ali
[al-Lakhnawi, circa 1731-1810], surnamed Bahr al-
‘Ulum (the ocean of sciences!), who spent the latter
part of his life at Madras. In his commentary on the
Musallam al-thubut [The Sure Proof, by Muhibb
Allah Bihari, died 1707], named Fawatih al-rahamut
[Keys to the Realm of Mercy], treating on the prin¬
ciples of the Muhammadan Common Law, the
maulavi writes: “Some people consider that ijtihad
fi ’l-madhhab, relative independence in legislation [as
long as one remains within the rulings of the same
madhhab, or legal school], was closed after the death
of Allama [‘Abdullah ibn Ahmad al-]Nasafi [died
1310], and ijtihad mutlaq, or absolute independence,
had become extinct since the four imams [founders
of the four Sunni legal schools]. These men have
gone so far as to make it incumbent on Muslims to
follow one of these imams. This is one of their many
foolish ideas, which can have no authority for itself,
nor should we pay any regard to what they say. They
are among those in connection with whom the Pro¬
phetical hadith has that ‘they award their decision
without knowledge, they go astray, and mislead oth¬
ers. They have not understood that this assertion is a
pretension to know the future which is only known
to God.’ Referring to Sura 34, Verse 31, which has
*.. . but no soul knoweth what it shall have gotten
on the morrow.’”
Characteristics of the Schools
of Jurisprudence
The characteristics of each of the four orthodox
schools now in force would show that they were
never intended to be either divine or finite.
Hanafis. Imam Abu Hanifa made almost no use
of traditions [hadiths] as a source of law, admitting
only 18 of them as authoritative in his system. His
jurisprudence was exclusively founded on private
opinion and analogy, called ra ’i and qiyas respec¬
tively. Taking these two principles for the basis, he
and most of his disciples spun out a complete legal
system. His own teaching was oral, and he compiled
no book. All the maxims, theories, hypotheses, logi¬
cal deductions, inferences, and developments worked
out by his disciples and their disciples—of whom
Abu Hanifa never dreamt—in their turn, go by his
name, and authority. The disciple of Abu Hanifa
named Abu Yusuf [Ya'qub al-Kufi, died 798] was
far too prone to set aside traditions in his legal deci¬
sions and resolve points of law by means of rational
deductions, which in fact destroyed the tradition or
Common Law under the pretense of obeying it.
Malikis. The system of legislation adopted by Imam
Malik was chiefly based on “the customs of Medina.”
It may be called strictly a Common Law comprising
usages and practices of the people among whom he
lived, and for whom he wrote the hitherto unwritten
law. He utilized 300 traditions [hadiths] in his
Muwatta' [ The Well-Trodden Path.]. It was, moreover.
THE PROPOSED POLITICAL, LEGAL, AND SOCIAL REFORMS 281
a system better adapted to the simple modes of Ara¬
bian life than the elaborate, artificial, and complicated
one of the Hanafts. The system of Imam Malik, based,
as it was, on the customs of Medina, was purely a
local one. The precepts which sufficed for the primi¬
tive Arab city were not deemed efficient to cope with
the wants of a vast concourse of human beings abroad.
But by some chance, the system of Imam Malik pre¬
vailed chiefly throughout Spain and Northern Africa.
Shafi‘is. Imam Shafi‘i was an eclectic. He built
up his system on the materials of Abu Hanifa and
Malik. But he was the first person who composed a
work on the principles of exegesis and jurisprudence,
called usul.
Hanbalis. Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal discarded
altogether the principle of deductions or analogical
judgments. In his Musnad [hadith collection], he
embodied 30,000 traditions [hadiths]. His system
was both in its theological and legal aspects, a reac¬
tion to the lax spirit of the age. The Hanafi court
jurisconsults under the caliph Ma’ mun [reigned 813-
833], by the extreme elasticity which the principle
of analogical deductions 8 afforded them, found no
difficulty in making the moral doctrines of the Qur’an
subservient to the most wanton excesses of arbitrary
power, and pandering to the licentious passions of
caliphs and amirs [rulers]. To check this great evil,
Imam Ahmad had resort to the prophetical traditions
which were current amongst the commonalty.
Though most of these traditions were unauthentic
fabrications, they contained the principles of the re¬
publican form of government, and hence were well
suited to check the profligacies of despotic caliphs.
8. I have given an instance of such ridiculous deductions
[later in] this work. There is another cited by Colonel [Rob¬
ert Durie] Osborn [1835-1889] in Islam under the Khalifs of
Baghdad , p. 28. “Thus,” he writes, “there is a verse in the Sec¬
ond Sura [verse 22] which says, 'God has created the whole
world for you.' According to the Hanafi jurists, this text is a
deed of gift which annuls all other rights of property. The
‘you’ means, of course, the true believers; and the whole
world has been created for their use and benefit. The whole
earth they then classify under three heads: 1) land which never
had an owner; 2) land which had an owner and has been aban¬
doned; 3) the persons and the property of the infidels. From
this third division the same legists deduce the legitimacy of
slavery, piracy, and a state of perpetual war between the faith¬
ful and the unbelieving world.” I have not come across such
a fanciful corollary, and I do not think the persons and prop¬
erty of the non-Muslims can come under the divisions of the
Earth. Perhaps Colonel Osborn was misinformed. [. . .]
Zahiris. I here take the opportunity of mention¬
ing another orthodox system of jurisprudence
founded by Dawud Abu Sulayman al-Zahiri, a na¬
tive of Isfahan, generally known by his surname al-
Zahiri, which means the exteriorist. He was so called
because be founded his system of jurisprudence on
the exterior or literal meaning of the Qur’anic texts
and traditions. He thus rejected the authority of an
ijma ‘ (the general consent of the Muslims), and the
qiyas or analogical judgments, the third and the
fourth sources of Muhammadan jurisprudence. He
was bom in 201 or 202 a.h. and died in 270 a.h . 9 His
system was a reaction to the Hanafi school, as he
rejected both ijma ‘ and qiyas. Another reaction was
that of Ahmad bin Hanbal, who rejected the analogi¬
cal reasoning, and held an ijma \ or the unanimous
consent of the mujtahids, at a certain time impossible.
[Abu Muhammad ‘ Ali] Ibn Hazm [994-1064] and
[Muhyi al-Din] Ibn ‘Arabi [1165-1240], the two
Spanish writers, as well as [Abu Ishaq Ibrahim ibn
Sayyar al-]Nazzam (died 231) [845 a.d.] and
[Muhammad] Ibn Habban (died 354) [965 a.d.], have
likewise denounced the authority of an ijma ‘ other
than that of the Companions of the Prophet.
These Systems Not Finite in Their Nature
This account of some of the important and main
schools of jurisprudence will be sufficient to prove
that none of the systems was imposed as finite or
divine, and that neither the founders of these sun¬
dry systems intended them to be so, nor wished their
own to bear precedence over others. Every system
was progressive, incomplete, changeable, and under¬
going alterations and improvements. The logical
deductions, analogical judgments, and capricious
speculations which were adhered to for want of
information in the beginning were wholly done
away with in after days, in the system of legislation.
Every tendency was centered in legislating with re¬
gard to the wants and wishes of the people, and to
the changes in the political and social circumstances
of the new [Islamic] Empire. Every new school of
jurisprudence made legislation experimental and
inductive, while the former systems of speculative
9. See Ibn Khallikan [1211-1282], Biographical Dictio¬
nary. translated by [Baron William] de Slane [1801-1878],
volume 1. p. 502, note 1.
282 Chiragh 4 Ali
and deductive legislation were shelved into oblivion.
Ahmad ibn Hanbal, the last of the four orthodox
imams, wholly disregarded the fourth principle of
Muhammadan legislation, that is, analogical reason¬
ing or deductive judgment. About a century later, the
Zahiri school set aside the third principle also, that
is, the ijma ‘ or the unanimous consent of the Doc¬
tors of Law in a certain epoch, as the former ijma ‘s
on several points of legislation did not well suit the
altered circumstances of later ages. Consequently, the
legislation of the Muhammadan Common Law can¬
not be called immutable; on the contrary, it is change¬
able and progressive.
Review of the Sources of the Law
I have given a short sketch of the principal schools
of Muhammadan jurisprudence in the foregoing
pages. I will here review briefly the sources of its civil
and canon law. There are three constituent elements
of the Muhammadan Common Law: first, the Qur’an;
second, the traditions from the Prophet and his Com¬
panions; third, the unanimous consent of the learned
Muhammadans on a point of the civil or canon law
not to be found in the two preceding sources; [and]
last, the supplemental source, the qiyas, [an] analogy
of the process of reasoning by which a rule of law is
established from any of the three elements.
The Qur'an
The Qur’an does not profess to teach a social and
political law, all its precepts and preachings being
aimed at a complete regeneration of the Arabian com¬
munity. It was neither the object of the Qur’an, the
Muhammadan Revealed Law, to give particular and
detailed instructions in the Civil Law, nor to lay down
general principles of jurisprudence. Some points of the
civil and political law which were the most corrupt and
abused have been noticed in it, such as polygamy,
divorce, concubinage, and slavery. In these as well as
other denunciations against immoral practices, the
Qur’an has checked and removed the gross levity of
the age. A few judicious, reasonable, helpful, and
harmless accommodations were allowed by the Qur’an
to some of the civil and social institutions of the pagan
and barbarous Arabs, owing to their weakness and
immaturity. These accommodations were set aside in
their adult strength, or in other words when they had
begun to emerge under its influence from their barbar¬
ism into a higher condition of amelioration.
The more important civil and political institutions
of the Muhammadan Common Law based on the
Qur’an are bare inferences and deductions from a
single word or an isolated sentence. Slavish adher¬
ence to the letter, and taking not the least notice of
the spirit of the Qur’an, is the sad characteristic of
the Qur’anic interpretations and deductions of the
Muhammadan doctors. It has been said there are
about 200 out of 6,000 verses of the Qur’an on the
civil, criminal, fiscal, political, devotional, and cer¬
emonial (canon or ecclesiastical) law. Even this in¬
significant number of the ayat ahkam (law verses),
a thirtieth part of the first source of the law, is not to
be depended upon. These are no specific rules, and
more than three-fourths of them, I believe, are mere
letters, single words, or mutilated sentences from
which fanciful deductions repugnant to reason, and
not allowable by any law of sound interpretations,
are drawn. 10
For the purpose of legal and juridical interpreta¬
tions of the Qur’an, apart from the doctrinal, moral,
prophetical, and historical interpretations, the words,
sentences, and their uses have been divided and sub¬
divided into four symmetrical divisions as follows:
Words
Khass (Special)
‘Amm (Collective or Common)
Mushtarik (Complex)
Mu'awwal (Required to be explained)
Sentences
Zahir (Obvious)
Zahir (Obvious)
Nass (Manifest)
Mufassar (Explained)
Muhkam (Perspicacious)
Khafi (Hidden)
Khafi (Hidden)
Mushkal (Ambiguous)
Mujmal (Compendious)
Mutashabih (Intricate or Allegorical)
10. Some of the Muhammadan doctors have exerted
themselves in picking out the law verses, as they are so called,
and in compiling separate treatises in which they have made
an abstract of all such verses of the Qur’an. They have ap¬
plied them to the different heads of the various branches of
the canon and civil law, giving their fanciful processes of rea¬
soning and the deductive system of jurisprudence.
THE PROPOSED POLITICAL LEGAL, AND SOCIAL REFORMS 283
Their Uses
Haqiqat (Literal)
Majaz (Figurative)
Sarih (Clear)
Kinaya (Metaphorical)
The Process of Reasoning
‘Ibarat (Plain Sentence)
lsharat (Hint)
Dalalat (Argument)
Iqtida’ (Requirement)
This will show that the 200 verses are not specific
rules or particular teachings of the Qur’an on the civil
law, most of the deductions being fortuitous inter¬
pretations.
In short the Qur'an does not interfere in political
questions, nor does it lay down specific rules of con¬
duct in the Civil Law. What it teaches is a revelation
of certain doctrines of religion and certain general
rules of morality. Under the latter head come all those
civil institutions of the ancient Arabs, such as infan¬
ticide. polygamy, arbitrary divorce, concubinage,
degradation of women, drunkenness, reckless gam¬
bling, extortionate usury, superstitious arts of divi¬
nation, and other civil institutions which were com¬
bined with religious superstition and gross idolatry.
These all have either been condemned, or ameliorated
and reformed. These subjects are neither treated as
civil in situations, nor have any specific rules been
laid down for their conduct. But the Muhammadans
have applied the precepts of the Qur’an to the insti¬
tutions of their daily life to as great an extent as the
Christians have done with regard to those of the
Bible, and as much as circumstances permitted. There
has been a tendency rather to expand than to contract
the application of the Jewish law to the wants of
modem society. In Christendom, theology has been
severed from morals and politics only very lately.
“The separation from morals was effected late in the
seventeenth century; the separation from politics
before the middle of the eighteenth century.” 11 The
enlightened Muhammadans of Turkey and India are
in this nineteenth century striving to do the same, and
this will, in no way, affect their religion. How futile
is the remark of Sir W[illiam] Muir [1819-1905],
who writes, “The Coran [Qur’an] has so encrusted
the religion in a hard and unyielding casement of
11. [Henry Thomas] Buckle [1821-1862], History of
Civilization in England (London, 1878), volume 1, p. 425.
ordinances and social laws, that if the shell be bro¬
ken, the life is gone.” 12
The Traditions or Sunna
There is a vast ocean of traditions from the Prophet,
his Companions and their successors, on the various
subjects of the social, political, civil, and criminal law
incorporated in the Muhammadan law books. In fact
the Companions of the Prophet and their successors
were averse to commit to writing the traditions con¬
cerning the private life and public teachings of the
Prophet. But naturally the conversation of the follow¬
ers of the Prophet was much about him. The Com¬
panions and their successors enthusiastically expa¬
tiated upon his acts and sayings, specially when the
later generations had endowed him with supernatu¬
ral powers, and the same was the case with the [Chris¬
tian] Gospels. Consequently the traditions grew
apace. The vast flood of traditions soon formed a
chaotic sea. Truth and error, fact and fable, mingled
together in an indistinguishable confusion. Every
religious, social, and political system was defended,
when necessary, to please a caliph or an amir , to serve
his purpose, by an appeal to some oral traditions. The
name of Muhammad was abused to support all man¬
ner of lies and absurdities, or to satisfy the passion,
caprice, or arbitrary will of the despots, leaving out
of consideration the creation of any standard of test.
It was too late when the loose and fabricated tra¬
ditions had been indiscriminately mixed up with
genuine traditions, that the private and individual zeal
began to sift the mass of cumbrous traditions. The
six standard collections of traditions 13 were compiled
in the third century of the Muhammadan era, but the
sifting was not based on any critical, historical, or
rational principles. The mass of the existing traditions
were made to pass a pseudocritical ordeal. It was not
the subject matter of the tradition, nor its internal and
historical evidence which tested the genuineness of
a tradition, but the unimpeachable character of its
12. The Early Caliphate and Rise of Islam, being the
Rede Lecture for 1881, by Sir William Muir, p. 26.
13. Muhammad ibn Isma'il Bukhari, died 256 a.h. [870
a.d.]; Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj Nishapuri. died 261 a.h. [875 a.d.];
Abu Da'ud al-Sijistani, died 275 a.h. [889 a.d.]; Abu ‘Isa
Muhammad Tirmidhi, died 279 a.h. [892 a.d.]; Abu ‘Abd al-
Rahman Nasa’i, died 303 a.h. [915 a.d.]; [Muhammad ibn
Yazid] Ibn Majah al-Qazwini. died 273 a.h. [887 a.d.].
284 Chiragh ‘Ali
narrators and their unbroken links [back] to the time
of the Prophet or his Companions, with two or three
other minor observations and technicalities. The cri¬
terion of the subject matter, and the application of an
intelligent and rational canon, was left to others.
Hence the critics did not consider the traditions called
akhbar-i ahad (single reports) to be binding on the
conscience.
The European writers like Muir, Osbom, [Thomas
Patrick] Hughes [1838-1911], and Sell, while describ¬
ing the Muhammadan traditions, take no notice of the
fact that almost all of them are not theoretically and
conscientiously binding on the Muslims. This, in fact,
demolishes the foundation of the Common Law. But
the legists argue that though the traditions carry no
authority with them as single reports, they are practi¬
cally binding on the Muslim world. This is tantamount
to our acting in accordance with the traditions even
when our reason and conscience have no obligations
to do so. The maxim of the critics who had collected
and sifted the traditions—that in general, however
sound and strong their isnad [chain of transmission]
may be, they are not to be believed in and they do not
convey a sure knowledge of what they relate—had in
reality left no necessity for them to frame a criterion
of truth to test a tradition on the ground of its intrinsic
incredibility, or rational principles.
Now, though most of the Muhammadan civil and
political as well as the canon laws are derived from
traditions, it is apparent they cannot be unchangeable
or immobile, from the simple fact that they are not
based on sure and positive grounds. Muhammad had
never enjoined his followers to collect the oral tra¬
ditions and random reports of his public and private
life, nor even did his Companions think of doing so.
This circumstance establishes beyond all contradic¬
tion the fact that he did not interfere with the civil
and political institutions of the country, except those
which came in direct collision with his spiritual doc¬
trines and moral reforms. This is certainly an incon¬
trovertible proof that the civil and political system,
founded on hazy traditions and uncertain reports, are
in no way immutable or finite.
The Ijma 1
The unanimous consent of all the learned men of the
whole Muhammadan world at a certain time on a
certain religious precept or practice for which there
is no provision in the Qur’an or sunna, is called an
ijma‘. If any one of the constituent doctors dissents
from the others, the ijma ‘ is not considered conclu¬
sive or authoritative.
Shaykh Muhyi al-Din Ibn ‘Arabi, a Spanish writer
of great authority and sanctity (died in 638 a.h.);
Dawud Abu Sulayman al-Zahiri, a learned doctor of
Isfahan, and the founder of the Zahiri (Exteriorist)
school of jurisprudence; Abu Hatim Muhammad ibn
Habban al-Tamimi al-Basti, generally known as Ibn
Habban (died 354 a.h.); Abu Muhammad ‘Ali Ibn
Hazm, also a Spanish theologian of great repute (died
400 a.h.); and, according to one report, Imam Ahmad
ibn Hanbal (died 241 a.h.), denounce the authority
of any ijma ' other than that of the Companions of the
Prophet; while Abu Ishaq Ibrahim ibn Sayyar al-
Nazzam al-Balkhi, generally known as Nazzam (died
231 a.h.), and Ahmad ibn Hanbal, according to an¬
other report, deny the existence of any ijma \ whether
of the Companions or other Muslims in general.
Imam Malik, the famous legist and founder of the
second school of jurisprudence, admitted the author¬
ity of the ijma ‘ of the Medinites only, and not of any
one else. In fact, his theory or system of legislation
was based chiefly on the practices and usages of the
people of Medina. Imam Shaft‘i, the third of the or¬
thodox imams, and founder of the school of Muham¬
madan jurisprudence which bears his name, held that
an ijma‘ (unanimous consent of all the learned Mus¬
lims of the whole Muslim world, at a certain time on
a certain point of law) becomes binding on all, only
on the expiration of the age in which they who had
thus unanimously constituted the ijma ‘ lived; provided
that none of them had ever swerved from the opinions
held by him at the time of the ijma \ as the dissentient
voice of a single individual in his afterlife would dis¬
solve the ijma ‘ and nullify its authority.
The ijma ‘ is either ‘azimat [a necessary practice],
when all the learned men declare their consent to the
law point or maxim agreed upon, or they commence
practicing the same if it be practicable. It is called
rukhsat [a rule of indulgence or dispensation] when
it is tacitly permitted by those who do not give their
consent thereto. Under this circumstance it is also
called suquti, silent or mute, but Imam Shafi‘i would
not admit the latter as authoritative.
It is held by Imam Abu Hanifa that only that ijma ‘
can be authoritative on a point of law in which there
would have been no disagreement before the ijma ‘
took place. Such is the report of [Abu’l-Hasan]
THE PROPOSED POLITICAL, LEGAL, AND SOCIAL REFORMS 285
Karkhi [died 952], Imam Muhammad [al-Shaybani,
circa 750-805] does not agree with his master [Abu
Hanifa] on this point, and Abu Yusuf had two ver¬
dicts of his own. In one of them he gives his consent
to the sentiments expressed by his master, Abu
Hanifa, and in the other with his fellow pupil, Imam
Muhammad.
When at a certain period there were two parties
differing from one another, it is not allowed at a sub¬
sequent period to dissent from both the previous
opinions and constitute ijma‘ on a third. Such an
ijrna ' is called murakkab [composite].
A report of ijma ' having taken place must be com¬
municated to posterity by a vast concourse of report¬
ers in each age, so as to remove the doubt of its be¬
ing spurious. The report of an ijma ‘ communicated
to us as related above is called ijma ‘ mutawatir [con¬
sensus attested to by multiple sources], but if it is not
reported in such a manner, it is styled ijma ‘ ahad [a
consensus verified on the basis of only one source].
The former is considered to be binding on the con¬
science as a true report necessitating implicit obedi¬
ence, the latter cannot be obligatory, that is, we can¬
not believe it to be true, yet our compliance thereto
is necessary.
This is then the theory of ijma the third principle
of the Muhammadan Common Law or system of leg¬
islation. But its very foundation is shaken by the most
eminent jurisconsults and legists who would not
admit in the first place the existence of such an ijma
as being practically impossible. In the second place
they would not admit its authority except on the
strength of the Prophet’s Companions. In the third
place some of them would not allow any ijma‘
whether it be derived from the Companions or from
some other source. In the fourth place, supposing that
such ijma ‘s have taken place and exercise universal
authority, it is impossible that the transcriptions of
their reports will successively reach us and will be
binding on the conscience. It is absurd to believe in
its decision, though we do not know certainly
whether there was any ijma ', or not.
Mr. Sell has been apparently misinformed on the
subject of ijma', as it appears in his The Faith of
Islam. His quotations bearing on the subject are all
derived from secondary sources which ought not to
be authoritative at all. He quotes from what he calls
“a standard theological book much used in India,”
as follows: “ Ijma ‘ is this, that it is not lawful to fol¬
low any other than the four imams ” (page 19). He
writes further on without referring to any “standard
theological work”: 14 “The ijma' of the four imams
is a binding law on all Sunnis” (page 23). Now
whether there was ever an ijma ‘ as defined above to
follow blindly these imams , or these imams ever
constituted an ijma‘, is to be decided. There is no
proof for the former; as for the latter, it is unsatisfac¬
tory on the bare face of it, for the four imams were
not contemporaries of one another, how could they
then effect an ijma '?
Qiyas
Qiyas is wrongly described by Mr. Sell as the fourth
foundation of Islam. 15 The reverend gentleman has
committed another great mistake in calling it a foun¬
dation of the faith. 16 Technically it means analogi¬
cal reasonings based on the Qur’an, traditions, or
ijma'. It is therefore not an independent source of law,
[so that] the medium, or as it is called the illat (cause
or motive [behind the ruling]), through a process of
reasoning must be found in one of the three sources
of law. All these analogical reasonings are doubtful
in their origin, and cannot in any way carry weight of
authority with them. Notwithstanding this, qiyas is the
greatest source of the Muhammadan Civil Law. How
can it then be called a final or immutable law?
The authority of qiyas as a source of law was
denounced by Ibn Mas’ud, a companion of the
Prophet (died 32 a.h.); by ‘Amr al-Shubi, one of the
successors of the companions at Kufa (died 109 a.h.
[727 a.d.]); by [Abu Bakr] Muhammad ibn Sirin
(died 110 a.h. [728 a.d.]); by Hasan al-Basri (died
110 a.h. [728 a.d.]); and by Ibrahim al-Nazzam (died
231 a.h .). 17 Dawud [Abu Sulayman] Isfahani, the
founder of the Zahiri sect (died 270 a.h.) and his
son Muhammad [Ibn Dawud ibn]‘Ali (died 294 a.h.
[909 a.d.]) well versed in jurisprudence, and Abu
14. This subject has nothing to do with the Muhammadan
theological books. The subject falls within the province of
jurisprudence. It is fiqh [jurisprudence] or usul [principles of
jurisprudence] and is quite separate from theology, or ilahiyat
or aqa'id. The four imams are never called theologians, but
they are mere legists or casuists.
15. The Faith of Islam, p. 27.
16. Ibidem.
17. See Ibn Hajar [al-‘Asqalani. Egyptian religious
scholar, 1372-1449] in Fath al-bari [The Creator’s Con¬
quest], a commentary on Bukhari quoting from Ibn ‘Abd al-
Barr [978-1070], [‘Abdullah] Darimi [797-869], et cetera.
286 Chiragh ‘Ali
Bakr Ibn Abi 'Asim [al-Dahhak, 822-900], a juris¬
consult who flourished in the fourth century [tenth
century a.d.], have also disapproved of qiyas or juris¬
prudential deductions, and have rejected that mode of
proceeding.
Hafiz Abu Muhammad ‘Ali Ibn Hazm, generally
known as Ibn Hazm, a Spanish writer of great repute
in Muhammadan theology and jurisprudence (died
400 a.h.), had written a treatise denouncing the va¬
lidity of ra ’i, “opinion,” of qiyas, “analogical deduc¬
tions,” of istihsan [using discretion in preferring less
obvious analogies], “a sub-division of qiyas as the
source of law,” of dalil, “the ascertainment of the
causes or motives of the precepts” (and making ana¬
logical deductions therefrom), and taqlid, “the blind
pursuit of one of the four schools of Muhammadan
jurisprudence.”
Some Chapters of the Civil Law
Require Rewriting
There is no doubt that the several codes of Muham¬
madan jurisprudence were well suited to the then-
existing state of life in each stage of its development,
and even now where things have undergone no
changes, they are sufficient enough for the purpose
of good government and regulation of society. But
there are certain points in which the Muhammadan
Common Law is irreconcilable with the modem
needs of Islam, whether in India or Turkey, and re¬
quires modifications. The several chapters of the
Common Law, [such] as those on political institutes,
slavery, concubinage, marriage, divorce, and the dis¬
abilities of non-Muslim fellow subjects are to be re¬
modeled and rewritten in accordance with the strict
interpretations of the Qur’an, as I have shown in the
following pages.
Equality between Fellow Subjects
Legal, political, and social equality on a much more
liberal scale than hitherto granted by the several
khatts [decrees] and firmans [orders] of the [Otto¬
man] Turkish sultans 18 must be accorded in theory
18. [The Tanzimat reforms of the nineteenth century
granted certain citizenship rights to all Ottoman subjects.—
Ed.]
as well as in practice even in the “shara 7” or reli¬
gious tribunals of Turkey. On the other hand, con¬
formity, in certain points, with foreign laws must be
allowed to Muslims, living under the Christian rule,
either in Russia, India, or Algiers. Political and so¬
cial equality must be freely and practically granted
to the natives of British India. Political inequality,
race distinctions, and social contempt evinced by
Englishmen in India toward their fellow subjects, the
Natives, is very degrading and discouraging.
Major [earlier referred to as Colonel] Osborn
writes: “The experience of British rule in India shows
that where the subtle and persuasive power of sym¬
pathy is wanting, where social equality does not or
cannot exist, there the gulf which divides the con¬
queror from the conquered remains unfilled. Within
the boundaries of Hindustan we have established
peace and placed within the reach of her people the
intellectual treasures which the happier West has
accumulated, but we are farther than ever from win¬
ning their affections. Never, perhaps, did the people
of India dislike the Englishman with a profounder
dislike than at the present day. There are hundreds
of educated Muhammadans and Hindoos in that
country who are as clearly convinced as any Euro¬
pean of the falseness of their ancestral beliefs, the
incompatibility of their old ways of life with intel¬
lectual and social progress. But such convictions do
not detach them from the external profession of those
beliefs, the diligent observance of those obsolete
practices. They cling to them as a kind of protest
against the conqueror. They prefer to bury themselves
in the darkness, than be led toward the light by guides
whom they abhor. And why is this? It is because the
presence of the Englishman in India is a wound in¬
flicted on their self-respect, which never heals, which
the experience of almost every day causes to bleed
afresh. The Englishman does not mean to lacerate
their feelings. He cannot help conveying in his
speech, his manners, and his actions, that calm, un¬
doubting conviction of immeasurable superiority
with which he is inwardly possessed; his exclusive¬
ness is due, partly of course, to his insular rigidity,
but far more to the constitution of native society,
which renders free intercourse between the two races
simply impossible. But, on the other hand, it is not
strange that the native should be unable to make al¬
lowances for difficulties of this kind. He only sees
an alien race settled in the land which his ancestors
ruled, and conducting themselves as though they
THE PROPOSED POLITICAL, LEGAL, AND SOCIAL REFORMS 287
were beings made of a finer clay than the people
whom they govern. He knows and feels that he can¬
not enter their presence without being reminded at
every instant that he is regarded as an inferior. His
inability to resent the tacit insult (for so he regards
it), his powerlessness to free himself from the strong
hand which holds him in his grasp, tend, of course,
to intensify the bitterness of his hate. What we have
done for India is to convert it into a gigantic model
prison. The discipline we have established is admi¬
rable, but the people know they are prisoners, and
they hate us as their jailers. And until a prison is
found to be an effective school for the inculcation of
virtue, and a jailer a successful evangelist, it is folly
to expect the regeneration of India. Reports on her
material and moral progress will, of course, continue
to be written, but if we estimate the effects of Brit¬
ish rule, not by trade statistics but by its results on
the spirit of man, we shall find that the races of India
have declined in courage and manliness, and all those
qualities which produce a vigorous nation, in propor¬
tion to the period they have been subjected to the
blighting influence of an alien despotism. There is
no human power which can arrest the progress of
decay in a people bereft of political freedom, except
the restitution of that freedom. This sentence of doom
glares forth from the records of all past history, like
the writing of fire on the wall of Belshazzar’s pal¬
ace. It is a hallucination to suppose that British rule
in India is a reversal of the inexorable decree.” 19
Who Can Effect the Proposed Reforms?
But now the question naturally comes up before us.
Who can effect the proposed reforms mentioned
above? I reply at once, His Imperial Majesty the
[Ottoman] Sultan. He is competent enough to bring
about any political, legal, or social reforms on the
authority of the Qur’an, just as the former sultans
introduced certain beneficial measures both in law
and politics in direct contravention of the Hanafi
school of the Common Law. He is the only legal
authority on matters of innovation; being a succes¬
sor to the successors of the Prophet, and the amir al-
mu 'minin [leader of the believers], the saut al-hayy,
or the living voice of Islam. The first four caliphs,
19. Major R. D. Osborn, Islam under the Arabs (London,
1876), pp. 274-276.
no doubt, had an arbitrary power to legislate, and of
their own authority (ijtihad) they modified at will the
yet undeveloped leges non scripta [unwritten laws]
of Islam. The imaginary caliph of the Quraysh
[Muhammad’s tribe], to be chosen by the Faithful and
installed at Mecca to invite the ‘ulama’ [religious
scholars] of every land to a council at the time of
pilgrimage for the purpose of appointing a new
mujtahid with a view to propound certain modifi¬
cations of the shari ‘a, necessary to the welfare of
Islam, and deducible from traditions, as proposed by
Mr. W[ilfrid S.] Blunt [1840-1922], is not required
at all. 20
It has been stated on high authority that all that is
required for the reform of Turkey is that the qanun ,
or orders of the sultan, should take the place of the
Hanafi Law. The sultan is competent enough to do
so either as a sultan or a caliph. The idea that by so
doing Islam would cease to be the state religion is
groundless, for Islam, as a religion, is not a barrier
to the good administration of the Turkish govern¬
ment. As a caliph, the sultan is not bound to main¬
tain the Hanafi Law, which is said to suit ill the con¬
ditions of modem life. All the perfect caliphs [the first
four successors of the Prophet] have existed before
the compilation of the Hanafi Law, and during the
subsequent caliphates, it was not fully and univer¬
sally administered, there being different laws in dif¬
ferent Muhammadan countries.
How to Begin the Proposed Reforms:
To What Can We Make Appeal?
I do not agree with Colonel Osborn, who remarks that
a religious revolution is required before the work of
political reform can begin in a Muhammadan state. I
will not repeat here my reasons, as I have already
fully explained how the social, legal, and political
reforms can be introduced in Muhammadan states.
But I will briefly discuss here how it is to begin. To
what can we appeal?
“There is not a crime or defect in the history of
Islam,” writes Major Osborn, “the counterpart of
which is not to be found in the history of Christendom.
Christians have mistaken a lifeless formalism for the
vital element in religion; Christians have interpreted
20. Wilfrid S. Blunt, The Future of Islam (London, 1882),
pp. 165-166.
288 Chiragh ‘Ali
the Gospel as giving a sanction for the worst cruelties
of religious persecution; Christians have done their
utmost to confine the intellect and the moral sense
within limits defined by a human authority; but the
strongest witness against all these errors has been
Christ Himself. Every reformer who rose to protest
against them could appeal to Him and His teaching as
his authority and justification. But no Muslim can lift
up his voice in condemnation of polygamy, slavery,
murder, religious war, and religious persecution, with¬
out condemning the Prophet himself; and being
thereby cut off from the body of the Faithful.” 21
I have protested against polygamy, slavery, and
intolerance in this book, and have appealed to the
Qur’an and the teachings of Muhammad. The sub¬
jects of murder, religious wars, and religious perse¬
cutions I have fully discussed in my other work, en¬
titled All the Wars of Muhammad Were Defensive. 22
See also pages 13 to 16 of the first part of this book.
All the political, social, and legal reforms treated
of in the following pages are based on the authority
and justification of the Qur’an. The Muhammadans
have interpreted the Qur’an as giving sanction to
polygamy, arbitrary divorce, slavery, concubinage,
and religious wars. But the strongest witness against
all these errors is the Qur’an itself. For the Qur’anic
injunctions against polygamy, arbitrary divorce, re¬
ligious persecutions and wars, slavery, and concu¬
binage, consult the following verses:
Against polygamy, [Sura] 4, [Verses] 3 and 128.
Against arbitrary divorce, [Sura] 2, [Verses] 226,
227, 229, 230, 237, 238; [Sura] 4, [Verses] 23-
25, 38, 39,127-129; [Sura] 33, [Verse] 48; [Sura]
58, [Verses] 2, 5; [Sura] 65, [Verses] 1, 2, 6.
Against religious intolerance, [Sura] 109; [Sura] 88,
[Verses] 21-24; [Sura] 50, [Verses] 45,46; [Sura]
72, [Verses] 21-24; [Sura] 16, [Verses] 37, 84;
[Sura] 29, [Verse] 17; [Sura] 18, [Verse] 40; [Sura]
42, [Verse] 47; [Sura] 2, [Verse] 257; [Sura] 44,
[Verse] 12; [Sura] 3, [Verse] 19; [Sura] 24, [Verse]
53; [Sura] 9, [Verse] 6; [Sura] 5, [Verses] 93, 99;
[Sura] 18, [Verse] 28; [Sura] 39, [Verses] 16, 17;
[Sura] 6, [Verse] 107; [Sura] 10, [Verse] 99.
Against slavery, [Sura] 90, [Verses] 8-15; [Sura] 2,
[Verse] 172; [Sura] 24, [Verse] 33; [Sura] 5, [Verse]
91; [Sura] 47, [Verse] 4; [Sura] 9, [Verse] 60.
21. Robert Durie Osborn, Major in the Bengal Staff Corps,
Islam under the Khalifs of Baghdad (London, Mil), p. 80.
22. Is being printed by Messrs. Thackers, Spink, and
Company, Calcutta. [...]
Against concubinage, [Sura] 4, [Verses] 3, 29-32;
[Sura] 24, [Verse] 32; [Sura] 5, [Verse] 7.
The last verse, as it has not been quoted in page
174 of this book, I take the opportunity of quoting
here: “ .. . And you are permitted to marry virtuous
women who are believers, and virtuous women of
those who have been given the Scriptures before you,
when you have provided them their portions, living
chastely with them without fornication, and not tak¬
ing concubines.”— Rodwell’s Translation [by J. M.
Rodwell, 1808-1900],
Mr. Stanley Lane-Poole [1854-1931] remarks in
his introduction to [Edward W.] Lane’s [1801-1876]
selections from the Qur’an: “If Islam is to be a power
for good in the future, it is imperatively necessary to
cut off the social system from the religion. At the be¬
ginning, among a people who had advanced but a little
way on the road of civilisation, the defects of the so¬
cial system were not so apparent; but now, when
Easterns are endeavouring to mix on equal terms with
Europeans, and are trying to adopt the manners and
customs of the West, it is clear that the condition of
their women must be radically changed if any good is
to come of the Europeanising tendency. The difficulty
lies in the close connection between the religious and
social ordinances in the Qur’an: the two are so inter¬
mingled that it is hard to see [how] they can be disen¬
tangled without destroying both. The theory of rev¬
elation would have to be modified. Muslims would
have to give up their doctrine of the syllabic inspira¬
tion of the Qur’an, and exercise their moral sense in
distinguishing between the particular and the general,
the temporary and the permanent: they would have to
recognize that there was much in Muhammad’s teach¬
ing which, though useful at the time, is inapplicable
to the present conditions of life; that his knowledge
was often partial; and his judgment sometimes at fault;
that the moral sense is capable of education as much
as the intellect, and, therefore, that what was appar¬
ently moral and wise in the seventh century may quite
possibly be immoral and suicidal in a society of the
nineteenth century. Mohammad himself said, accord¬
ing to tradition, ‘I am no more than a man: when I order
you anything respecting religion, receive it; and when
I order you about the affairs of the world, then 1 am
nothing more than man.' And he seemed to foresee that
the time would come when his minor regulations
would call for revision: ‘Ye are in an age,’ he said, ‘in
which, if ye abandon one-tenth of what is ordered, ye
THE PROPOSED POLITICAL, LEGAL, AND SOCIAL REFORMS 289
will be ruined. After this, a time will come when he
who shall observe one-tenth of what is now ordered
will be redeemed.’” 23
I have shown here as well as in the second part of
this book that Islam as a religion is quite apart from
inculcating a social system. The Muhammadan pol¬
ity and social system have nothing to do with reli¬
gion. Although Muhammadans in after days have
tried to mix up their social system with the Qur’an,
just as the Jews and Christians have done in apply¬
ing the precepts of the Bible to the institutions of their
daily life, they are not so intermingled that “it is hard
to see [how] they can be disentangled without de¬
stroying both.” In effecting the proposed reforms, it
is not necessary to modify the theory of inspiration.
The political and social reforms which I have ex¬
plained in the first and second parts of this book are
neither casuistical deductions, nor fortuitous interpre¬
tations, nor analogical constructions of the Qur’ an, but
on the contrary, they are the plain teachings, self-in¬
dicating evident (; zahir ) meanings, nass, mufassar, or
muhkam (obvious) injunctions of the Qur’an.
The Qur'an Not a Barrier to Spiritual
Development or Political and
Social Reforms
In short, the Qur’an or the teachings of Muhammad
are neither barriers to spiritual development or free-
thinking on the part of Muhammadans, nor an obstacle
to innovation in any sphere of life, whether political,
social, intellectual, or moral. All efforts at spiritual and
social development are encouraged as meritorious and
hinted at in several verses of the Qur’an.
“... Then give tidings to my servants who listen
to the word 24 and follow the best thereof; they it is
whom God guides, and they it is who are endowed
with minds.” Sura 29, Verse 19.
“And vie in haste for pardon from your Lord.”
[Sura] 3, [Verse] 127.
“Hasten emulously after good.” [Sura] 2, [Verse]
143.
23. Mishkat at-Masabih [The Lights of "The Lamps ",
by Muhammad Khatib al-Tibrizi, 14th century], volume 1,
pp. 46, 51.
24. I have followed Professor [Edward Henry] Palmer’s
[1840-1882] translation. Mr. [George] Sale [circa 1697—
1736] and the Reverend Rodwell translate “my word.” The
original text does not warrant the word “my.”
“Be emulous for good deed.” [Sura] 5, [Verse] 33.
.. And others by permission of God, outstrip
in goodness, this is the great merit.” [Sura] 35,
[Verse] 29.
“These hasten after good, and are first to win it.”
[Sura] 23, [Verse] 63.
“And that there may be among you a people who
invite to the Good, and enjoin the Just, and forbid
the Wrong. These are they with whom shall be well.”
[Sura] 3, [Verse] 100.
These verses fully sanction the development of
the Muslim mind in all spheres of life.
Church and State
Not Combined Together
There is a tradition related by the Imam Muslim to
the effect that Muhammad the Prophet while com¬
ing to Medina saw certain persons fecundating date
trees. 25 He advised them to refrain from doing so.
They acted accordingly, and the yield was meager
that year. It being reported to him, he said, “He was
merely a man. What he instructed them in their reli¬
gion they must take, but when he ventured his opin¬
ion in other matters he was only a man.” 26
This shows that Muhammad never set up his own
acts and words as an infallible or unchangeable rule
of conduct in civil and political affairs, or, in other
words, he never combined the church and state into
one. The Arab proverb, “State and religion are
twins,” is a mere saying of the common people, and
not a Muslim religious maxim. It is incorrect to sup¬
pose that the acts and sayings of the Prophet cover
all law, whether political, civil, social, or moral.
Free Thinking Sanctioned by the Prophet
It has been narrated by Tirmidhi, Abu Da’ud, and
Darimi that Muhammad, when deputing Mu'adh [ibn
Jabal, died 627] to Yemen, had asked him how he
25. “By means of the spadix of a male tree which is
bruised or brayed and sprinkled upon the spadix of the fe¬
male by inserting a stalk of the raceme of the male tree into
the spadix of the female, after shaking off the pollen of the
former upon the spadix of the female.”—Lane’s Arabic Lexi¬
con, book 1, part 1, p. 5.
26. See Mishkat al-Masabih , chapter on i'tisam bissunna
[adherence to tradition].
290 Chiragh ‘Ali
would judge the people. Mu‘adh said, “I will judge
them according to the Book of God.” Then Muham¬
mad asked again, “And if you do not find it in the
Book of God?” The former returned, “I will judge
according to the precedent of the Prophet,” but he
was once more questioned, “If there be no such pre¬
cedent?” to which it was speedily replied, “I will
make efforts to form my own judgment ( ijtahidu
ra’i ).” 27 Muhammad thanked God for this judicious
opinion of his delegate.
It is evident from this anecdote of Muhammad that
he never intended his teachings to bear a despotic
influence on the Muslim world, and become univer¬
sal obstacles to all kinds of political and social re¬
forms. He did not prevent any change from taking
place, and never wished to keep Islam stationary. He
did never intend to make legislation purely deduc¬
tive; on the contrary, he made it inductive. Mu‘adh
was to rely on his own judgment, which makes leg¬
islation purely inductive. The tradition not only sanc¬
tions enlightened progress but encourages an intel¬
ligent and healthy growth of the mind, and leads to
the search of new truths.
Regarding this tradition, Syed Ameer ‘Ali [Indian
reformer, 1849-1928; see chapter 43] says, “It was
‘an age of active principles’ which Mohammed ush¬
ered in,” 28 concerning which the Reverend Mr. Sell
says: “It is true that ijtihad literally means ‘great ef¬
fort,’ it is true that the Companions and mujtahidin
[mujtahids] of the first class had the power of exer¬
cising their judgment in doubtful cases, and of de¬
ciding them according to their sense of the fitness of
things, provided always that their decision contra¬
vened no law of the Qur’an or the sunna ; but this in
no way proves that Islam has any capacity for
progress, or that ‘an age of active principles’ was
ushered in by Muhammad, or that his ‘words breathe
energy and force, and infuse new life into the dor¬
mant heart of humanity.’ For, though the term
27. The isnad of the tradition by Tirmidhi is from Hannad
[ibn al-Sari], from Waki‘ [ibn al-Jarrah], from Shu'ba [ibn
al-Hajjaj], from Abi ‘Awn, from Harith ibn al-‘Amr, from the
persons in the company of Mu'adh, and from Mu'adh him¬
self. Another isnad is from Muhammad ibn Bishar, from
Muhammad ibn Ja'far and ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Mahdi, from
Shu‘ba, from Abi ‘Awn, from Harith ibn ‘Awn, and Mughira
ibn Shu'ba’s nephew, from the people of Hims, from Mu'adh.
28. Syed Ameer ‘Ali, Moulvi, M.A., LL.B., A Critical
Examination of the Life and Teachings of Mohammed (Lon¬
don, 1873). p. 290.
‘ ijtihad' might, in reference to the men I have men¬
tioned, be somewhat freely translated as ‘one’s own
judgment,’ it can have no such meaning now. It is a
purely technical term, and its use and only use now
is to express the referring of a difficult case to some
analogy drawn from the Qur’an and the sunna.”
Mr. Sell commits a palpable error in saying that the
word “ijtihad,” translated as “one’s own judgment,”
“can have no such meaning now.” His own words
show that formerly, that is, in the time of Muhammad
and up to the time it was restricted to a jurisprudential
or legal technicality, centuries after Muhammad, it had
the classical or literal meaning of “one’s own judg¬
ment.” We know that in the phraseology of the Mu¬
hammadan principles of jurisprudence, a science but
of late origin, the word “ ijtihad ’ is a purely technical
term, and its use in that science is to express the refer¬
ring of a difficult case to some analogy drawn from
the Qur’an and the sunna. But such was not the case
during Muhammad’s time. In the classical Arabic it
was, and is, used to mean making great efforts, and
when the word “ra’i” or opinion, is suffixed to it, it
means making effort to form a judgment. Mu‘adh said,
“Ijtihadu ra ’i,” that is, “I will make efforts to form my
own judgment.” But Mr. Sell considers that Mu'adh
only used the word “ijtihad” which is now a purely
conventional word among the jurists, as a technical
term, but this is altogether an absurd supposition. In
the first place, Mu'adh did not use the simple word
“ijtihad” which is now restricted to a particular and
technical meaning, but he prefixed it with the word
“ra’i” my own judgment. Secondly, he did not and
could not use it in its subsequent technical sense now
in use, which got currency among the legists centu¬
ries after Mu'adh.
The Tradition Secures Us Enlightened Progress
and Removes the Fetters of the Past
We lay no stress on the word ijtihad, [as] it simply
signifies making effort, moral or mental, but we lay
stress on the word “ra’i,” opinion, judgment, and
thought; and the tradition secures for us a wide field
of spiritual development, moral growth, an intellec¬
tual and enlightened progress, and reformed legisla¬
tion. It unfetters us from the four schools of jurispru¬
dence, and encourages us to base all legislation on
the living needs of the present, and not on the fossil¬
ized ideas of the past.
40
Sayyid Ahmad Khan
Lecture on Islam
Sayyid Ahmad Khan (North India, 1817-1898) was the most prominent early leader of
the modernization movement among Indian Muslims, noted especially for his advocacy
of social and educational reforms. He came from a noble family and was brought up in
his grandfather's house, as his father died young. He did not receive a traditional madrasa
(seminary) education, but did study the Qur’an in Arabic and Persian classics. As an
employee in the British colonial judiciary, he was greatly affected by the failed struggle for
independence of 1857. Ahmad Khan became active in analyzing both the causes of the
revolt and the reasons for what many perceived as the backwardness of Muslims in sci¬
entific and social fields. He concluded that the Muslims' needs could be addressed by a
program of education that would incorporate both modern subjects and a respect for
Islamic values. Therefore, in 1875, he established the Mohammadan Anglo-Oriental
College at Aligarh in North India, offering English-medium higher education, His journal
Tahdhib al-Akhlaq (Refinement of Morals ) was a showcase of modernist thought, featuring
his articles and those of like-minded supporters. Prevalent themes in his writings include
"demythologized" Quranic interpretation, presenting the sacred texts as in harmony with
science and reason, criticism of hadith (narratives of the Prophet), and calls for renewed
ijtihad (religious interpretation). In the passage that follows, Sir Sayyid—be was knighted
in 1888 by the British Empire—presented the case for renewed Islamic theology, ca¬
pable of assuring an appropriately scientific and rational understanding of religious truth. 1
[(i) No Claim to Authoritative Teaching]
My brothers in religion! You have come here today
desiring that I may state before you my ideas about
the religion of Islam. For that I am grateful to you. I
have no objection to stating my ideas before friends
who are eager to listen to them. Yet, first, I want to
say this—I am an ignorant person, neither a maulavi
[religious scholar], nor a mufti [religious official],
nor a qadi [judge], nor a preacher. Also, I do not
wish that anybody, even my closest friend, should
[blindly] follow my ideas. I consider that no person,
except the Messenger of God, has such a rank in
matters relating to the things of heart and spirit—
matters between God and His servants—as to make
him wish that people should follow him [blindly].
This rank was that of the messengers, and finally, that
of the Prophet of God, Muhammad Mustafa (the
Chosen of God)—may God keep alive his religion
that is from eternity to eternity—and, indeed. He will
surely keep it alive; as it is without beginning, so it
is without end. With Islam has arrived the end of
prophethood.
But before I state my ideas, I should first like to
explain my objective in presenting them. 1 think that
there are in this world, since it was peopled and from
the time God began regularly to send His prophets
and messengers—from that time till today—there
have [always] been and still are two kinds of people.
Sayyid Ahmad Khan, “Lecture on Islam,” translated from
(Jrdu by Christian W. Troll in Sayyid Ahmad Khan: A Rein¬
terpretation of Muslim Theology (New Delhi, India: Vikas
Publishing House, 1978), pp. 307-332. Lecture delivered in
Lahore on February 2, 1884, before the Anjuman-i Himayat-
i Islam (Islamic Protection Association). Introduction by
Marcia K. Hermansen.
1. Altaf Hussain Hali, Hayat-i Javid (Immortal Life),
translated by David J. Mathews (New Delhi, India: Rupa &
Co., 1994); J. M. S. Baljon, The Reforms and Religious Ideas
of Sir Sayyid Ahmad Khan (Lahore. Pakistan: Ashraf, 1958).
B. A. Dar, Religious Thought of Sayyid Ahmad Khan (Lahore,
Pakistan: Institute of Islamic Culture 1957): Hafeez Malik,
Sir Sayyid Ahmad Khan and Muslim Modernization in India
and Pakistan (New York: Columbia University Press, 1980).
Christian W. Troll, Sayyid Ahmad Khan: A Reinterpretation
of Muslim Theology (New Delhi. India: Vikas, 1978).
291
292 Sayyid Ahmad Khan
One group concerning whom God has said, “God
guideth whom He will unto a straight path.” [Qur’an,
Sura 2, Verse 213] “Lo thou (O Muhammad) guidest
not whom thou lovest, but God guideth whom He
will.” [Sura 28, Verse 56] “It may be that thou
tormentest thyself (O Muhammad) because they be¬
lieve not.” [Sura 26, Verse 31] With regard to the
second group He has said to His Messenger that you
cannot guide those whom you desire to guide. How¬
soever much you try—even if you torment your soul
to death—they will not believe. These are the two
groups of men which we find clearly depicted in the
Glorious Qur’an. From there it becomes evident with
regard to those who have believed formerly and those
who believe now that God has made their natural
constitution or their nature such that the disposition
for belief or unbelief is in it. Because there can be
no change in what is the nature of man. It is beyond
the power of the person himself or any other person,
and be he even a prophet, to change it.
[(ii) Unquestioned Belief and
Critical Belief]
This occurs daily in all aspects of our life. In this
world many things happen, the truth of which we can¬
not prove. But in the heart, from unknown causes,
something arises by which their truth acquires full
certainty. This applies exactly to Islam. Thousands,
hundred thousands, even ten millions of men have
passed or are alive now or lived at the very time of
the Messenger of God whose heart accepted the in¬
struction and who believed firmly in the truth of it,
although they had no knowledge of the arguments for
its truth. The only reason for this [their firm belief]
was that God had made their heart in such a way that
they would, even with a minimum of instruction,
accept the straight path. Their heart accepted this
guidance and they believed. (Cheers. ) Thanks are due
to God that at this moment, too, that His mercy is
lavished over thousands, hundred thousands, and ten
millions of Muslims. These people from their heart
believe in Islam without knowing the proofs for its
truth according to the principles of logic and philoso¬
phy. I am convinced that people who believe in Islam
without the arguments and proofs of philosophy have
a more solid faith than those who believe in Islam or
hold it for certain on the basis of philosophical proofs
and arguments. Because into their hearts no shade of
doubt and hesitation has found its way, there is no
room for that in their heart. These people are the ahl-
i jannat [people of paradise], who will go straight to
heaven. (Cheers.)
I remember a story of my country. In our region
there lives a tribe, the Ramghar [a branch of the
Rajput, settled in the region of Gurgaon, Punjab],
which at some time had become Muslim. Probably
up to the time before Maulavi [Shah Muhammad]
Isma'il [Shahid, religious reformer, 1789-1831], all
the customs of the Hindus were practiced among
them. They wore dhotis [loincloths] and shirts of the
ulte pardi type [tunics cut to open on the left side,
Hindu-style, rather than the right]. The qadi [Mus¬
lim judge] performed the marriage, and the Brahmin
led the bride around the fire. Many other Hindu cus¬
toms were common among them. One day a Muslim
passed through one of their villages. He was thirsty
and desired to drink water. He saw an earthen pot
kept there, filled with water. Yet he had doubts
whether this water belonged to Hindus or Muslims.
The person he asked about it answered very harshly:
“Are you blind? Don’t you see on top of the earthen
water jar the kulhra (that is an earthen cup for drink¬
ing water)?” As if this was a sign for being a Mus¬
lim—whereas all people [Muslims and Hindus] drink
water from [such] a cup. He had answered harshly
because the traveler had doubts about his being a
Muslim, in spite of the presence of the [supposedly
distinctive] Muslim sign.
My brothers! When these people were so ignorant,
how could they know the tenets of Islam and the
philosophical arguments for its truth? There was
nothing on the basis of which they could call them¬
selves Muslims, except the faith in God and His
Messenger. But, I assure you. I consider their faith
to be much more solid than my own faith. (Why
should I mention somebody else’s?)
My brothers! The faith of such people who have
no doubt whatsoever, nor any uncertainty in their
heart, is usually very solid and intense. They believe
with the certainty of their heart in God and the Prophet
and recognize as Muslim anyone who calls himself so.
They do not need any logical proof or philosophical
demonstration for knowing God and for believing in
the Prophet. Whatever is stated to them as having been
taught by God and the Messenger, be it irrational or
unbelievable, be it true or false, they will believe in
it. I consider such people the stars of firm belief, mod¬
els of firm Islam and true Muslims.
LECTURE ON ISLAM 293
But there is also the second group, which wants a
proof for the truth of everything. People of that group
desire that the tenets of Islam should be explained to
them by philosophical argument, that the doubts of
their hearts be removed so that their hearts may find
satisfaction. They do not want that whilst in their
heart they waver, they should confess [outwardly] by
tongue, “Yes, yes”—for fear of the people and be¬
cause of the pressure of society. These alone are the
people we address and with whom we argue.
[(iii) A Precedent to the Present Situation]
At the time when the reign of the ‘Abbasid caliphs
[750-1258] flourished and the star of the Muslims
was at its zenith, Greek philosophy and natural sci¬
ence had gained popularity among the Muslims, with
the result that doubts arose among the people con¬
cerning many questions regarding Islam. Because the
very people who acknowledged the tenets of philoso¬
phy and natural science to be true found a discrep¬
ancy between these and the contemporary teachings
of Islam, as they had been elaborated by independent
judgment, thus doubts about Islam arose among
them. If one can rely on history, it emerges as an
established fact that that period was one of hard at¬
tacks on Islam, and yet that Islam does not have to
fear damage from the hardest attacks by its hardest
enemies. All the 'ulama ’ [religious scholars] had to
define Islam at that time. They made great efforts to
protect Islam and to make it triumph. May God ac¬
cept their efforts! They established three ways of
protecting Islam. The first was to prove that tenets
of Greek wisdom and philosophy which were against
Islamic teachings were wrong. The second was to
formulate such objections to the propositions of
[Greek] wisdom and philosophy by which these te¬
nets would themselves become doubtful. Third, to
harmonize between the tenets of Islam and the tenets
of wisdom and philosophy.
By pursuing this debate, a new science originated
among Muslims which they call ‘ilm al-kalam [the
science of theological argumentation]. Till this day
the books of this science are part and parcel of the
learning and teaching of the ‘ulama’ of our religion,
and they are quite proud of them. It was for this rea¬
son that many of the tenets of Greek philosophy and
natural science of the third kind [that is, that which
could be harmonized] were incorporated by the
Muslims into their religious books and that, step by
step, they began to be accepted like religious tenets,
whereas in fact they are by no means connected with
the religion of Islam. It is no easy task today to sepa¬
rate them from it. Therefore, I think that since Islam
is in the same state, attacked in the same way as then,
we must make, to the best of our ability, the same
efforts our elders made in former times.
My friends! You know well that in our time a new
wisdom and philosophy have spread. Their tenets are
entirely different from those of the former wisdom
and philosophy [of the Greeks]. They are as much in
disagreement with the tenets of ordinary present-day
Islam as the tenets of Greek wisdom and philosophy
were with the tenets of customary Islam during their
time. Moreover, an especially difficult problem is
posed by the tenets of Greek natural science. The
erroneousness of these tenets is by now an estab¬
lished fact. Yet the Muslim scholars of that time ac¬
cepted them like religious tenets, as I have just ex¬
plained, and this has made things even more difficult.
[(iv) Former Science and Modem Science]
My friends! Another problem is the big difference
between critical research today [and its results] and
the tenets of Greek wisdom of old, because the te¬
nets of former wisdom were based on rational and
analogical arguments, and not upon experience and
observation. It was very easy for our forbears, whilst
sitting in the rooms of mosques and monasteries, to
disprove teachings arrived at by analogous reason¬
ing and to refute rational teachings by rational dem¬
onstrations, and not to accept them. But today a new
situation has arisen which is quite different from that
[brought about] by the investigations of former phi¬
losophy and wisdom. Today doctrines are established
by natural experiments [that is, experiments in natu¬
ral science], and they are demonstrated before our
eyes. These are not problems of the kind that could
be solved by analogical arguments, or which can be
contested by assertions and principles which the
‘ulama’ of former times have established. Take for
instance the question of the piercing of the roof of
heaven and the closing of [the doors of] heaven,
which is a very big issue in the natural sciences of
our tradition, and which has lived on in our learning
and teaching. Closely connected with this question
are also the principles of natural science which have
294 Sayyid Ahmad Khan
been accepted in the religion of Islam. But of what
use is this doctrine [of the piercing and closing of the
cupola of heaven] now and what utility is there in
studying and teaching it, since it has been established
that the way in which former philosophers and
‘ulama’ decided upon the existence of heaven is
wrong. What is needed now is to reflect upon what
“heaven” means, and for this it is necessary to work
out new principles and tenets instead of simply call¬
ing to memory the worn-out and obsolete doctrines.
(Cheers.)
A very big issue with us was that of matter and
form. If one accepted matter following [the under¬
standing of] Greek philosophy, then the existence of
a state after death, which is an important tenet of
Islam, would be in vain. The long discussions of the
philosophers of Islam concerning this issue were
somehow fruitless and insufficient. In any case,
present-day natural philosophy does not discuss
“matter” at all. Rather, it is accepted that all bodies
are composed of small elements. What is therefore
the use of the debate on matter and form, a discus¬
sion which forms a part of our religious and worldly
teaching? There are many other problems of this kind
which could be stated as an example here.
My friends! Forgive me when I say that one highly
necessary subject has been neglected by the ‘ulama ’.
They did much to confront Greek wisdom and phi¬
losophy, but nothing or very little to satisfy the heart
of the denier or doubter of Islam, by the way they
would present to them the religion of Islam. It is
neither sufficient for the firm believer, nor does it
satisfy the mind of the doubter, to say simply that in
Islam this has been taught in this way and has to be
accepted. (Cheers.)
[(v) Need for a New ‘llm al-Kalam]
In the same way, there are many other reasons for
which in our time Muslims need to adopt new meth¬
ods in controversy. The person who considers Islam
to be true and believes firmly in it, that person’s heart
will testify that Islam alone is true—whatever
changes may occur in logic, philosophy, and natural
science, and however much the doctrines of Islam
seem to be in contradiction with them. This attitude
is sufficient for those who believe with a true and
uncomplicated mind in Islam, but not for those who
reject or doubt it. Furthermore, it is by no means a
work of proper protection to confess just by the
tongue that Islam is true, and to do nothing to
strengthen it in its confrontation with the modern
propositions of wisdom and philosophy. Today we
need, as in former days, a modern ‘ilm al-kalam by
which we either render futile the tenets of modern
sciences or [show them to be] doubtful, or bring them
into harmony with the doctrines of Islam.
I am not well acquainted with all the venerable
persons present in this assembly; yet I am sure that
quite a number of learned people are present in this
gathering. I address myself to them with utmost sin¬
cerity—those of you who are able to make an all-out
effort to harmonize the tenets of contemporary natu¬
ral science and philosophy with the doctrines of
Islam, or to prove the futility of the tenets of contem¬
porary science and philosophy and yet fail to do so,
are all sinners—and certainly so. If only two or three
among them accomplish this task, then undoubtedly
the collective duty will have been fulfilled. (Cheers.)
I happen to believe that there is nobody who is
well acquainted with modern philosophy and mod¬
ern natural science as they exist in the English lan¬
guage, and who at the same time believes in all the
doctrines which are considered doctrines of Islam
in present-day understanding. May the English-
educated [literally English-reading] young men and
students forgive me, but I have not yet seen anybody
well acquainted with English and interested in the
English sciences who believes with full certainty in
the doctrines of Islam as they are current in our time.
I am certain that as these sciences spread—and their
spreading is inevitable and I myself after all, too, help
and contribute toward spreading them—there will
arise in the hearts of people an uneasiness and care¬
lessness and even a positive disaffection toward
Islam as it has been shaped in our time. At the same
time, I believe firmly that this is not because of a
defect in the original religion, but rather because of
those errors which have been made, wilfully or not,
to stain the face of Islam.
I am never entitled to claim that I could clean the
black stains of these errors from the luminous face
of Islam, or that I could take upon me the responsi¬
bility to undertake the work of protecting Islam.
This is the duty and the privilege of other saintly
and learned people. But since I have striven to
spread among Muslims those sciences which, as I
have just stated, are to a certain extent in discrep¬
ancy with contemporary Islam, it was my duty that,
LECTURE ON ISLAM
295
as far as it could be done by me, I should do, rightly
or wrongly, whatever was in my power to protect
Islam and to show forth to people the original lu¬
minous face of Islam. My conscience told me that
if I failed to do so I should be a sinner before God.
(Cheers.)
O my friends! I do not say that whatever I inves¬
tigated is true. But once I had no other choice but to
do whatever could be done by me, then I had certainly
to do exactly what I did and what I am still doing.
God knows my pure intention. If I have done wrong,
may he forgive me who wants to and refuse to do so
who does not want to. If I have done any good, then
I do not want any reward from any human being.
Therefore I do not fear people calling me kafir [non-
Muslim] or nechari [naturist, meaning materialist],
nor do I frown upon it. I shall not ask those people
who slander me because of my efforts, and call me a
kafir, to intercede for me either. My good or bad
actions are with God. If I have made mistakes or shall
make mistakes in the future, then I hope to God that
He will have mercy on me. (Cheers.)
[(vi) Truth and the Plurality of Religions]
My friends! After this lengthy introduction I shall
now state my ideas concerning Islam. Whatever I say
here I shall certainly state in a free and frank man¬
ner. I shall not state my ideas precisely as a Muslim,
because in the statement of a doctrine from the point
of view of a Muslim, there is no need for this kind of
untrammeled argumentation [based purely on rea¬
son], At this moment I shall adopt a way of speak¬
ing which a third person would employ in explain¬
ing the principles and tenets of Islam to people who
have doubts about Islam or its principles. Or I address
myself to the English-educated young students whom
modem philosophy and the modem natural sciences
have thrown into doubt about the truths of the prin¬
ciples of Islam, or who have come to believe that they
are wrong. The person that states Islam to be true
must also state how he can prove the truth of Islam.
When people want to corroborate or affirm the truth
of their religion, be it Islam, Christianity, or Hindu¬
ism, they must first prove its truth. To argue that this
and this person is without any doubt holy, and that
we believe in the word of this holy person, is not
sufficient for establishing the truth of that religion,
because such a statement remains in the realm of mere
belief. Among all people who follow somebody,
whether an avatar or a prophet or the God of the
Christians, they all consider in the same way the one
whom they follow as holy. All members of a religion
hold the same firm belief in their religion as mem¬
bers of another religion in theirs. With what justifi¬
cation then can we call one religion true and the other
false?
However, if we say that we possess a book sent
by God, in which there is not even a suspicion of
error, then another person can say, in a similar man¬
ner, that I too possess the book of God, and not the
slightest doubt attaches to its truth. Given this state
of affairs, one must offer the reason for preferring the
one to the other, and one must be able to give a rea¬
son that satisfies, which is not based on some belief
[only], as for instance the book sent to us after all is
sent by God, whilst the one sent to the other is not.
If we put forward the miracles of our prophets to
prove the truth of our religion, then apart from the
difficulties which attach to the possibility and, fur¬
ther, to the proof of their occurrence, the followers
of the other religion likewise will state similar
miracles of their religious leaders. So what justifica¬
tion have we for acknowledging the miracles we put
forward as trustworthy, and for declaring those which
the other people put forward as false? All such argu¬
ments are based on beliefs [only]. Nobody can con¬
fute them, nor can anybody say that this belief is true
and this one wrong. If one person holds such a be¬
lief, how can one expect the other person to adopt
it? Therefore, in order to arrive at the truth, it is nec¬
essary that we discover a criterion and establish a
touchstone which is related to all religions in the
same manner, and by which we can prove our reli¬
gion or belief to be true. (Cheers.)
[(vii) The Criterion for Establishing the
True Religion]
Now I shall state this criterion which is related to the
religions of the whole world in the same way. By this
criterion I shall justify without any wavering what I
acknowledge to be the original religion of Islam, which
God and the Messenger have disclosed, not that reli¬
gion which the ‘ulama’ and blessed maulavis and
preachers have fashioned. I shall prove this religion
to be true, and this will be the decisive difference be¬
tween us [and] the followers of other religions.
296 Sayyid Ahmad Khan
No people, be they attached to a religion or not,
can deny that God has created humans as a compo¬
sition of various powers in such a way that they are
able to do one or the other work. During this life,
therefore, one has to adopt a mode of conduct that
coordinates one’s [exterior] forces and [interior] fac¬
ulties toward the purpose for which they exist, and
are created. Thus the only criterion for the truth of
the religions which are present before us is whether
the religion [in question] is in correspondence with the
natural disposition of humankind, or with nature. If
yes, then it is true, and such correspondence is a clear
sign that this religion has been sent by that One which
has created humankind. But if this religion is against
the nature of humans and their natural constitution,
and against their forces and faculties, and if it hin¬
ders humans from employing these profitably, then
there can be no doubt that this religion is not sent by
the One that created humankind, because everyone
will agree that religion was made for humankind.
You can mm this [around] and state to the same ef¬
fect that humankind was created for religion.
So I have determined the following principle for
discerning the truth of the religions, and also for test¬
ing the truth of Islam, that is, is the religion in ques¬
tion in correspondence with human nature or not,
with the human nature that has been created into
humankind or exists in humankind. And I have be¬
come certain that Islam is in correspondence with that
nature. (Cheers.)
No doubt this should have been the work of out¬
standing thinkers and scholars. I do not possess the
ability to achieve it. But for the reason I explained a
few moments earlier, I embarked upon it to the best
of my capability. I hold for certain that God has cre¬
ated us and sent us His guidance. This guidance cor¬
responds fully to our natural constitution, to our na¬
ture, and this constitutes the proof for its truth.
Because it would be highly irrational to maintain that
God’s work and God’s word are different and unre¬
lated to one another. All beings, including humans,
are God’s work, and religion is His word; the two
cannot be in conflict. This criterion I have established
for those who themselves in their heart want to settle
the truth of any religion and desire to satisfy their
minds, and also for those who are in doubt about
Islam, or oppose it. To my mind there be no further
additional criterion.
After determining this criterion, I clarified that
Islam is in full accordance with nature. So I formu¬
lated that “Islam is nature and nature is Islam.” This
is a wholly correct proposition. Yet, unfortunately,
there were people who deliberately accused me of
being a naturist, or nechari in a different sense. They
will have to answer for it before God. God is the
Creator of all things, as He is the Creator of heaven
and earth and what is in them, and of all creatures;
so is He also the Creator of nature. What a tremen¬
dous slander is it, therefore, when opponents state
that I call nature Creator or—God forbid—nature
God. What I declare to be created, they accuse me
of calling Creator. On that day when there will be the
interrogation of our deeds, there will stand before
God men with long full beards, with prayer marks
on their foreheads, wearing their pajamas neatly
above their ankles [sign of strict adherence to the
details of religious law]. Men who buy lies for truth—
they will be questioned. I leave them, who have made
this false accusation, to God. No, I do not leave them
to God; rather I forgive them on my part! (Very loud
cheers!) I do not want to take revenge of any brother,
of any fellow creature, neither in this world nor on
the Day of Resurrection. I am an utter nothing. Yet I
am a descendant of that Messenger who is the mercy
of the two worlds [heaven and earth]. I shall walk on
the path of my ancestor. And all people who have
spoken ill of me and accused me falsely or will do
so in the future—all of them I shall forgive. (Cheers.)
[(viii) This Path Is Not Entirely New in
the History of Islam]
Can anybody say that the path I have outlined above
is not apt to strengthen Islam? Can we not meet in
this way the great philosophers, the natural scientists,
and the atheists? Is our method in any way opposed
to Islam? Here, too, I do not claim that the method I
adopted is absolutely free from error. I am not infal¬
lible and do not claim to be so. I am an ignorant man.
I have done this work, for which I am not qualified,
out of love for Islam. No doubt it is a new path, and
yet in it I have followed the ancient ‘ulama ’. As they
developed an ‘ilm al-kalam in a new fashion, so I,
like them, have developed a new method to prove the
same truth. We cannot exclude the possibility of a
mistake. Yet future ‘ulama’ will render it fully cor¬
rect and will help Islam. In my view, Islam can be
reaffirmed against doubters in this way, and not in
any other. (Cheers.)
LECTURE ON ISLAM 297
[(ix) Basic Islam: Unity]
Gentlemen, you have asked me to state what Islam is.
In answer I say that Islam is [basically] the profession
of the tawhid (unity) of God. By the firm belief in that
unity, a person can be called a Muslim or Musalman
[Urdu for Muslim]. The person who in truth acknowl¬
edges God, and firmly believes in His unity, is a Mus¬
lim. This is the first and foremost pillar of Islam, and
all the other pillars are subordinate to it, and as deeply
linked with it as in a genuine drug various ingredients
are mixed up with the basic paste. Islam means to ac¬
knowledge God and to understand Him to be absolutely
One and the Creator of everything, but not only to know
and understand but rather to be certain of this, and a
Muslim is the one who firmly believes in it. God Al¬
mighty, when mentioning in the Holy Qur’an the itera¬
tion of Christians and Jews, has said, “Nay, but who¬
soever surrendereth his purpose to God while doing
good, his reward is with his Lord.” [Sura 2, Verse 112]
That is, those who believe in God direct their face to¬
wards Him and do good—their reward is with the Lord.
God did not want anything from the “people of the
book” except that they should acknowledge God and
serve Him, when He said, “O people of the Scripture!
Come to an agreement between us and you, that we
shall worship none but God.” [Sura 3, Verse 64] And
in one place the Prophet of God said that “My prayer
and my worship and my life and my death are for God.”
[See also Sura 6, Verse 126.] And after this he said, “I
am the first of those who surrender (unto Him).” [Sura
6, Verse 163] [The prophets] Ismail [Ishmael] and
Ibrahim [Abraham] said this prayer: “Our Lord, make
us submissive unto Thee and of our seed a nation sub¬
missive unto Thee.” [Sura 2, Verse 129] The disciples
of [the prophet] Jesus also, after believing in God, said:
“Bear Thou witness that we have surrendered (unto
Him).” [Sura 3, Verse 52] God said to Ibrahim, “Sur¬
render!” and Ibrahim said: “I have surrendered to the
Lord of the Worlds.” [Sura 2, Verse 131] Ibrahim en¬
joined to his sons: “O my sons! Lo! God has chosen
for you the (true) religion; therefore die not, save as men
who have surrendered (unto Him).” [Sura 2, Verse 132]
And in one place God has said, “Lo! Religion with God
is surrender (al-Islam)” [Sura 3, Verse 19] Again, God
has said: “Ibrahim was not a Jew; nor yet a Christian;
but he was an upright man who had surrendered (to
God), and he was not of the idolaters” [Sura 3, Verse
67]—that is, Ibrahim was not a Jew, nor a Christian,
but rather a pure Muslim. Hence the truth of Islam, as
God revealed it, is to acknowledge God and firmly
believe in Him.
One can have a firm belief in God and God’s unity
only when one has become absolutely certain about
His essence and attributes, which are, in reality, one,
and about His right to be worshiped, which is essen¬
tial to Him. To believe in His essence means to be¬
lieve that He exists as eternal essence without begin¬
ning or end, as One without associate. To believe in
His attributes means to be certain that in no one else
are attributes like His. The attributes like knowledge,
mercy, and life, and so on, are related to God. With
the notion of these, other attributes inevitably enter
our mind because they are associated in the imagi¬
nation. Now to acknowledge that the attributes of
God are pure and unalloyed [by other attributes as¬
sociated with them in our mind] means to believe
firmly in the attributes of God. To believe in His right
to be worshiped means that nothing but God deserves
to be worshiped, that is, is worthy of worship. The
person who in this way believes firmly in God is a
Muslim. Not I, [but] God Himself says so.
[(x) ... And Acknowledgment of the
One Who Finally Preached
Tawhid, Muhammad]
True, I shall certainly maintain that a person who ac¬
knowledges exclusively the One God [without recog¬
nizing Muhammad as His Prophet] is not a Muham¬
madan. The usage of the Qur’an is what I have stated,
but in our time Muhammadan and Muslim are used
synonymously. Therefore I consider it necessary to go
to a certain extent into detail. For being a Muham¬
madan, it is necessary that we firmly believe also in the
person who, in his bounty, has taught us tawhid, be¬
cause of whom we know God and recognize His at¬
tributes. Our reason tells us that we cannot refuse to
believe him as the guide through whom we received
guidance. It was Muhammad the Messenger of God
who guided us in Islam, the truth of which I have stated
with such firmness. Therefore, to affirm him [Muham¬
mad] as the Prophet sent by God is necessarily the sec¬
ond pillar of Islam, which c annot be separated from the
first. It follows from this whole passage that the per¬
son who acknowledges God and accepts Him as One
and without partner, and believes firmly in Him—yet
does not affirm any prophet [before Muhammad] nor
the Prophet [Muhammad]—such a person certainly
298 Sayyid Ahmad Khan
cannot be considered a Muhammadan or a Muslim, the
latter word taken here as a synonym of the first. Yet
according to the principles of Islam, it is not correct to
call such a person unbeliever in the sense of associa-
tionist [polytheist] or to refuse to call him a Unitarian.
No doubt, to affirm the prophethood is the sec¬
ond pillar of Islam. From early on, it has been a moot
point among the ‘ulama’ whether those who ac¬
knowledge only the unity of God [that is, without
believing in the prophets and Muhammad] will be in
eternal hellfire or not. Some maintained they would,
whereas others said they would reach salvation after
punishment. Leave this discussion to the ‘ulama’,
and let us stay with the saying of our Friend [the
Prophet]: “Despite Abu Dharr [al-Ghifari, a devout
companion of the Prophet, died 653], I did so.” 2
[(xi) The Religious Duties of Islam]
After the belief in the unity of God and the divine
mission of the Prophet, there are further elements in
Islam which God has established as religious duty, for
instance ritual prayer, fasting, pilgrimage, almsgiving,
and so on.
We consider those who do not perform these du¬
ties as sinners, and we regard the one who denies
them like the one who denies the divine mission of
the Prophet as not a Muhammadan or Muslim, both
terms taken synonymously. With regard to such
people’s eternal punishment in hellfire, the same dis¬
cussion arises which we mentioned in the context of
those who proclaim only the unity of God [but do not
believe in His messengers].
My friends! This is an important and extremely
subtle discussion, and to cover it very much time is
required. Because of [lack of] time we do good to keep
it short. Likewise, the question of associationism [poly¬
theism], which is the outright enemy of Islam and with
which Islam cannot go together by any means, is also
2. [Possibly a reference to the hadith (tradition of the
Prophet) related by Abu Dharr, in which Abu Dharr asked the
Prophet several times whether those who commit illegal
sexual intercourse and theft would be allowed into paradise
if they die believing in God and monotheism. The Prophet
answered in the affirmative: “Even if he had committed adul¬
tery and theft, despite Abu Dharr.” See the hadith collections
of Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj (821-875), volume 1, number 172;
and Muhammad ibn Isma'il Bukhari (810-870), volume 7,
number 717.—Ed.]
a big issue. Yet I shall explain it just a little bit here.
God is one in essence and attributes, and nobody shares
with Him in this unity. In the same way, therefore, those
who consider the precepts of any person—except those
of the Messenger—in religious matters as incumbent
on themselves, they too, in a way, associate [others with
God]. I call this associationism in prophethood. When
accusing Jews and Christians of the same thing, God
has said: “They have taken as lords beside God their
rabbis and their monks.” [Sura 9, Verse 31] Such a
following [of the precepts of men, except the Prophet]
leads finally to taking “lords beside God.”
Do not imagine from what I have said that I hold a
view opposed to the community of religious scholars.
No, I consider them to be the crown of the Crown of
the umma [Muslim community] and their ijtihad [in¬
dependent judgment] and differences of opinion a
source of mercy. Also, do not think that I denounce
those who follow them blindly or that I detest taqlid
[imitation of a religious scholar] as bad. But I certainly
do think that some of the actions of those who follow
blindly have Teached the point where they—by their
own mistake, not by virtue of following the commu¬
nity of religious scholars—have made the latter “lords
beside God.” And those people who are against this
tenet of blind following and hold the doctrine of
‘adam-i taqlid [absence of taqlid] and who desire to
try to implement this—these persons also I respect. I
consider the objective of both groups to be one. Both
desire to please God and the Messenger. {Cheers.) It
is a pity that because of these two groups, mutual vexa¬
tion and enmity have arisen. These are the evil inspi¬
rations of Satan, which are designed to split Islam and
weaken its power. In truth Islam means to profess “La
ilaha illah Allah,” [“There is no god but God,” the first
part of the Islamic profession of faith], to believe this
firmly and sincerely and to regard all who profess the
word as brothers. To split the assembly of Islam by
being opposed to one another is against the principles
of Islam, and is ingratitude for the blessing God has
bestowed upon us, which He has expressed in the
words: “And He made friendship between your
hearts.” [Sura 3, Verse 103] (Cheers.)
[(xii) The Belief in the Prophethood of
Muhammad, in the Modem Context]
Now I want to deal a little with those subjects that
are related to the affirmation of the prophethood [of
LECTURE ON ISLAM 299
Muhammad] and to those tenets of Islam that on first
sight seem to be opposed to reason and science. A
detailed treatment of these subjects would need a very
long time and would probably not be finished in
years. This is no matter of surprise. But it may not
be out of place to succinctly deal with these subjects
for the benefit of some English-educated young men,
or for other people who desire to alter their oudook.
To be a Muhammadan, or (what is synonymous
with it) to belong to the circle of Islam, demands
belief not only in the unity of God but also in the
divine mission of the Prophet, that is, in prophethood.
Two things put the English-educated or liberal-
minded young man into doubt. First, the belief in the
prophethood; second, those tenets of Islam which
seem to contradict contemporary wisdom and phi¬
losophy or reason, or which seem to be far removed
from reason. The discussion of the prophethood
along the principles of nature is a lengthy one. I am
not going to open it up now. Instead I shall state a
few points, as one does in a speech, concerning the
truth of the prophethood of Muhammad—points
which the heart can accept. Many great philosophers
of the past and present, who have reached a very high
rank in scholarship, and have written many excellent
books, accept, nevertheless, the teaching of basic
Islam and the principles upon which it is built. But
leave them aside and examine yourself how excel¬
lent, solid, and unrivaled the principles of basic Islam
are, omitting the independent judgments and com¬
plex problems of the jurisprudents, which do not cor¬
respond to the plain and simple principles of Islam.
Even those who all their life have investigated into
the essence of philosophy, wisdom, the natural sci¬
ences, and human nature—even such people would
not be able to establish such principles. I therefore
do not think it out of place to argue that a person who
was bom in a land full of sand and stones, who had
become an orphan at a tender age, who had neither
received training in a house of sciences nor heard the
doctrines of Socrates, Hippocrates, or Plato [Greek
philosophers, fifth-fourth century b.c.], nor sat at the
feet of a teacher nor enjoyed the company of wise
men, philosophers, or men of political and moral
science, but who spent forty years of his life among
uneducated and rude camel drivers, who for 40 years
had seen nobody but a people addicted to idolatry,
internecine warfare, and men and women who prided
themselves on theft and fornication. Such a man, who
all at once rose against all his own people and, al¬
beit surrounded on four sides by idolatry, yet pro¬
fessed “La ilaha illah Allah ”—who not only said it
but made all his people say it, people who for centu¬
ries had worshiped Lat and Manat and ‘Uzza [pre-
Islamic Arab goddesses]; who eradicated from his
people all this bad behavior and these immoral prac¬
tices; who made them throw to ground and break their
idols and exalted the name and worship of God
throughout the entire peninsula, the peninsula which,
after Ibrahim and Isma'il, had been sullied by a thou¬
sand acts of impurity. Who then restored to it its
original purity and the great religion of Ibrahim?
Who, I ask, after forty years, put light in man’s heart,
the light which has illuminated not only the Arab
peninsula but the whole world?
After teaching the shahada [profession of faith],
he gave the people precepts about the morals of reli¬
gion. Could any philosopher have said more than
what this illiterate man said? And not only did he
pronounce these precepts, but rather, by the influence
of his pure heart and tongue, he implanted them in
the hearts of people. This work was such that it could
not have been achieved by any philosopher or any
powerful political ruler. What was the thing in this
orphan child which demonstrated not only to the
Arab peninsula but to the whole world the wonder
of divinity?
O my friends! The most hardened materialist, ir¬
religious persons, if they do not—God forbid—ac¬
cept such a person as a prophet, surely they shall
have, at least, to acknowledge that if after God there
is any person as great, it is he alone. “My spirit a
sacrifice to you, O Messenger of God!” [Arabic
phrase] Thus whoever arrives at understanding the
true nature of prophethood cannot but put faith in the
prophethood of the Messenger of God. These few
words about our affirmation of prophethood will be
fully sufficient to satisfy the mind of a person who
possesses a little intelligence and understanding.
[(xiii) Need to Clearly Distinguish Between
the Doctrines of “Pure Islam" and
Later Doctrinal Elaborations]
Now I have to say something about the doctrines of
Islam. As you know very well, they are of two kinds.
One, what is revealed explicitly; the other, what is
arrived at by ijtihad —established by the 'ulama ’ in
the goodness of their heart and intention. If a doc-
300 Sayyid Ahmad Khan
trine of the second kind—that is, from those which
are called ijtihadiyat —should be contrary to nature
or human nature, then this does not bring any reflec¬
tion upon Islam, because such a doctrine is the inde¬
pendent judgment of a human being or mujtahid [one
who conducts ijtihad], and he is not preserved from
negligence and error.
The leaders of the four madhhabs [the four main
legal schools of Sunni Islam] have themselves ac¬
cepted the saying: “The mujtahid may err and may
be correct.” It is therefore pointless in our context to
discuss the ijtihad and qiyas doctrines [arrived at by
analogous reasoning] of the ‘ulama ’. They can be
right or wrong. We are partisans of Islam and not of
the opinion or independent judgment of every Tom,
Dick, and Harry. If there is an error in these, this does
not do any harm to Islam; and if they are correct, then
there is no reason whatsoever for Islam to be proud
of it. It is our task to establish the explicitly revealed
doctrines as being in correspondence with human
nature. Not by any traditional argument, nor by any
proofs of the mujtahids based on independent judg¬
ment, but by nature. We are prepared to prove these
doctrines by the same science, through the study of
which doubts have arisen in the hearts of those
people. Whatever people may think about our
claim—and although some people may consider it
impossible to fulfill—we proclaim with a loud voice
what is in our heart, and of what we are certain. In
our understanding, no doctrine of “pure Islam,” nor
anything stated in the Glorious Qur’an, is contrary
to any old or new science. Nor can any wisdom or
any philosophy demolish it. (Cheers.)
[(xiv) The Miracle of the Qur’an]
I firmly believe that there is no religion, except Islam,
which when compared with former or contemporary
research, with philosophy and natural philosophy,
emerges in all respects true and valid. Only that much
holds tme—that truth never changes. Yes, surely,
when the style of philosophy changes, the principles
of debate change, and there arises the need for new
argument. For this reason the arguments formerly set
up by our elders have lost their relevance in our time.
We need therefore to adopt a new method of contro¬
versy. The Glorious Qur’an, which for 1,300 years has
been firmly held to be mu jiz [that is, disabling an
opponent of the Prophet in a contest; in the follow¬
ing: miraculous], I, too, accept it as such. Yet our el¬
ders had put forward only a superficial argument for
its being miraculous, that is, the excellence of its pure
language and speech. And this only because till today
no human, no one, however fluent of speech, however
eloquent, has managed to compose one or ten verses
in the same fluency and eloquence, even when chal¬
lenged in a public contest to do so. No doubt I, too,
accept the Glorious Qur’an in the very same way as
fluent and eloquent of speech. And why should I not,
since I firmly believe that it is the word of God and
dictated revelation. Its words are the very same that
God put in the heart of the Messenger, and which
reached from the tongue of the Messenger. I also ac¬
cept that till today nothing comparable has been spo¬
ken by any human being. But I regard this proof to be
weak, not solid, and I do not interpret the relevant
passages of the Glorious Qur’an in this way. Further,
even if this proof is a real proof, it cannot still be put
forward in confrontation with nonbelievers. It will not
satisfy their mind. I have another proof which I con¬
sider more solid than the one mentioned. What proof
is this? The direction for man given in the Glorious
Qur’an cannot surely be bettered by others. This I
consider to be the miracle, rather the basic miracle of
the Glorious Qur’an. The Glorious Qur’an “de¬
scended” at a period marked by ignorant, uninformed,
and uneducated people. The Qur’an was at the same
time guidance for the ignorant people of that period
and guidance for the most highly educated people, then
and in all ages to come. It was necessary that its pre¬
cepts should be stated in such a way that both a
Bedouin camel driver of the desert and an outstand¬
ingly wise man like Socrates or Hippocrates would
likewise receive from them profit and guidance. The
Glorious Qur’an is a word that possesses this quality.
From it people of different degrees [of learning], or
rather opposed qualities, would receive one and the
same guidance. An ignorant Bedouin and a holy
maulavi would both receive from its literal meanings
the same guidance as a philosopher from the intended
meanings of the same words, and the latter would not
find one word [of it] opposed to nature or philosophy.
Compose for me and show me any book in any lan¬
guage—French, Latin. Arabic, Persian, Sanskrit, and
so on, or name me a book written formerly in these
languages which contains the most exalted thoughts
of philosophy and wisdom—and yet in extremely
pleasant and fluent words and which is of equal use
to both illiterate and learned, ignorant and philosopher,
LECTURE ON ISLAM 301
and which makes an equal impression on the hearts
of all; you will find it utterly impossible. The Glori¬
ous Qur'an is the only book in which there are all these
qualities, and this is the original, true, and real miracle
of it. Its doctrines were true when the earth was re¬
garded as immovable. In the same way today, when
the sun is regarded as immovable and the earth as re¬
volving round it, it is equally true and satisfies the
mind. Jews, Christians, Chinese, and Hindus all have
their books, which they regard as sacred. But tell me,
which of these possesses the quality I have explained?
In the Torah, it is stated that the sun halted for Joshua
[Book of Joshua, Chapter 10, Verse 13], If this was
the case, when would the destruction of the whole
world ever be accomplished? In contrast, the Glorious
Qur’an refrains from preaching such things, and if it
gives a counsel it is the following—“There is no alter¬
ing (the laws of) God’s creation.” [Sura 30, Verse 30]
I firmly believe, although it is liable to be opposed
as being a prediction, that if the wisdom and philoso¬
phy considered to be true today turn out tomorrow
to be wrong, as has happened to Greek wisdom in
our days, and should there be established as true to¬
tally new principles, still, I maintain, then also the
Glorious Qur’an will prove to be true in the same way
as it is true today. After reflection, it will be estab¬
lished that what was erroneous was so [on account
of] the deficiency of our knowledge—the Qur’an, in
contrast, is as true as ever. Our ancient exegetes have
greatly stressed [the need] to harmonize the Qur’an
with Greek wisdom and astronomy. But the people
who reflect on the Qur’an in the light of God’s guid¬
ance, understand that whatever might seem wrong in
it was their error and not that of the Glorious Qur’an.
[(xv) Explicitly Revealed Precepts and
Duties Elaborated by Rational Conclusions]
My brothers! My friends! This is an arduous road,
not free from obstacles. But for people who claim to
belong to the religion of Islam, it is necessary to re¬
flect about it. What I am doing [here] should have
been, in fact, the work of other people, not the work
of an ignorant man like me. But when no one under¬
took it, there was an impulse in my heart and I re¬
sponded to it. I understand that God put this impulse
into my heart. If I did not try to the best of my abil¬
ity, what answer was I to give to God? It is a pity that
people did not understand my intention and objec¬
tive, and that they opposed me on behalf of some
really minor differences which are not even com¬
pletely new [in the light of Islamic history], and made
various false accusations against me. Yet reflect
about the past conditions and study thoroughly the
books of former ‘ulama ’, and you will see what a
contradiction there exists between principles that lead
to kufr [disbelief] on the one side, and those on the
other leading to Islam. One group professes the vi¬
sion of God and says that it is explicitly revealed.
Then there is a group of the very traditional Sunni
scholars who profess God to have hands, feet, eyes,
and a nose, who firmly believe that He resides on a
throne, and who hold this to be explicitly revealed.
Another group opposes this and regards it as kufr. If
the former ‘ulama ’, from early on, have differed to
such an extent in basic matters, what then is my sin
when I differ from doctrines formulated by those
‘ulama’ of old? In the end they, too, were human
beings and not preserved and protected from error.
The undisputed and unequivocal, explicitly re¬
vealed precepts like prayer, fasting, pilgrimage, and
almsgiving which God Almighty has declared in the
Qur’an to be religious duty, I consider to be religious
duties in the same way as does an ignorant Muslim.
But when an opponent [of Islam] attacks them, it
becomes unavoidable to discuss their inner reason
and original meaning. When the question is raised
what the washing of hands and face, that is ablution,
has to do with worship, which after all relates to the
heart or what “out of place” rinsing and washing of
the mouth has to do with an accidental cause of ritual
impurity, or what has prayer, which is a spiritual
action, to do with standing, sitting, lowering of the
head, and raising of the hips, then we shall, willy
nilly, have to discuss the inner reason and original
meaning of the “pillars” of prayer, and we will have
to explain why ablution has been prescribed as a duty
and why the constituent parts of prayer have been
determined [by revelation]. To explain these things,
proofs by simply adducing revealed texts without
rational argument will not do. because the doubter
in religion, or the religious, will not accept such.
Rather, it will be necessary to explain them in a
manner corresponding with reason, nature, or human
nature, so that the mind of the other person will be
satisfied. (Cheers.) Or do you think it will satisfy
people who are an alien party to Islam to argue that
this and nothing else is the precept, accept it as it
stands?
302 Sayyid Ahmad Khan
[(xvi) The True Meaning of Islam as the
Perfect Religion]
O my brothers! Certainty, which is another name for
faith, does not originate from the mere saying of an¬
other person. If I, in this very situation here where a
splendid hall is illuminated by chandeliers made of
crystal, by glass shades and wall lamps, if I should
state: in this hall is total darkness—and you, out of
regard for me and my words, accept and repeat my
words, saying that yes, it is darkness, will there, be¬
cause of my saying so, be certainty in your hearts?
Surely if you are reasonable and truly and sincerely
consider me worthy of respect, and my words as de¬
serving certain assent, then you will, no doubt, reflect
and think about what is the meaning [here] of dark¬
ness. And when you have understood this, will there
then be in your heart true certainty? My point is this,
and I desire this from my Muslim brethren—don’t call
the Glorious Qur’an a miracle only by tongue, but
acknowledge it as a miracle in your heart. For this
reason, I have said that arguments should be put be¬
fore them through which certainty will originate about
the Qur’an being a miracle, or at least about its being
true. Since I had exactly such certainty about the
Qur’an, it was therefore my desire to demonstrate to
the world, without fear and anxious thought, whether
this agrees or disagrees with the opinion of the revered
men and without fearing ihcfatwas [religious rulings]
of kufr by the contemporary 'ulama ', that the Glori¬
ous Qur’an and Islam are likewise in accordance with
the nature of humankind. I hope that my Muslim breth¬
ren, insofar as they are able, will correct whatever I
have done, and if I have made mistakes will forgive,
instead of regarding me the inventor of a sect or the
founder of a new madhhab. I assure you that I affirm,
as far as I can, all the doctrines of Islam which are
authentic. Can you call this a new madhhab ? It is my
creed that the religion of Islam is the perfect and final
religion. I am absolutely certain of the word of God
which says that “this day I have perfected your reli¬
gion for you and completed my favor unto you, and
have chosen for you as religion al-Islam.” [Sura 5,
Verse 3] Yet if the exegetes—may God have mercy
upon them—explain the meaning of this perfection—
that God has made perfect religion by declaring this
animal halal [lawful to eat] and that animal haram
[unlawful]—then I oppose them, be they a Fakhr al-
Din Razi [famous exegete and theologian, 1149-1209]
or a Mulla [Abu’l-Hasan] ‘Ali Nishapuri [died 1075],
or somebody greater than them. I propose humbly to
these revered men. Sirs, if this is the meaning of the
perfection of religion, then adieu. I maintain that this
exegesis is wrong. The religion of Islam has been per¬
fected by pronouncing the unity of God in a perfect
way and by throwing light on every detail and prin¬
ciple of [this unity]. This alone is the perfection of
religion, and because of this perfection Islam is the last
religion and will stay on unchanged to the Day of Res¬
urrection. Yes, til after Resurrection as well. {Cheers.)
[(xvii) Distinction between Fundamental
and Nonfundamental Elements in the
Religious Commandments]
Now I want to say something about various precepts
mentioned in the Glorious Qur’an. Prayer, for in¬
stance—I understand that God has made prayer a
duty, precisely with respect to the nature God has put
into humankind, that is to say, in order that the
memory of the One worshiped may stay in the heart,
and that people may not forget their aim, and that they
may express their heartfelt longing and submission
before Him. This is the fundamental element of
prayer, which God has made a duty. Yet in order to
teach humankind how to perform this duty, he has
fixed “pillars” for it that, in reality, are not a funda¬
mental element of it. Rather, they are meant to pro¬
tect the fundamental element, and as such cannot be
separated from it. They have therefore become part
of the fundamental element, and have become incum¬
bent in the manner of the fundamental element. We
easily arrive at the distinction [between fundamen¬
tal and nonfundamental element] in the following
way, when we consider that people can be excused
from performing an element which is meant to pro¬
tect the fundamental one. Given the case of excuse,
the religious obligation of ablution, the obligation to
stand, sit, prostrate, yes, even to recite aloud, can be
waived. Yet, the attention toward God and the per¬
formance of sincere longing and submission, which
is the fundamental element of prayer, cannot be
waived as long as a person is conscious and breathes.
Thus it is crystal-clear that those elements which can
be waived in the end are not fundamental. Only that
element is fundamental which cannot at any time, as
long as a human is human, be waived. {Cheers.)
Now, who can say that this mode of prayer is against
nature or human nature? {Cheers.)
LECTURE ON ISLAM 303
True, the question remains with regard to these
fixed “pillars” of prayer—why have they been estab¬
lished and how do they accord with human nature?
My [first] answer is yes, they do correspond to human
nature. Yet here I shall answer in another, a philo¬
sophical way. If we were to determine some other
“pillars” for the performance of this [fundamental]
duty, then the same question that arises with regard
to the determining of the now established “pillars”
of prayer will arise, with regard to the proposed ones,
and so on. And to raise an objection that refutes it¬
self is unreasonable.
Of course, one must raise the point whether more
excellent “pillars” of prayer could not have been
established. But I am certain that no person could
name other “pillars” better than these, in which all
exoteric and esoteric, all inner and outer organs, all
ways of respect and submission of body and soul find
expression, and which impress man in accordance
with the exigencies of nature.
[(xviii) Overall Objective: Restatement
of Islam]
I have, in a succinct way, told you my thoughts con¬
cerning the religion of Islam. I have also explained
to you why I have adopted this new way of reaffirm¬
ing Islam and of [defending it in] debate. I have also
pointed out why I felt it necessary to take a stand
different from that of the former ‘ulama’. It would
need much time to state on which issues the ‘ulama'
differ among themselves, on which issues I have
taken a stand different from theirs, on which of these
latter issues some ancient ‘ ulama ’ too had chosen the
approach which is mine, and how many points there
are on which I am on my own and all former ‘ulama ’
are against me. Yet now, after my statement here, I
leave the critical assessment of the question whether
what I have said is a reaffirmation of Islam or not—
that, gentlemen, I leave to you.
To end, I want to say that the [kind of] reaffir¬
mation of Islam I have adopted to my best knowl¬
edge has not come about for the reason that I am a
Muslim, was bom in a Muslim family, and there¬
fore had willy nilly to reaffirm Islam. I do not think
highly of that [kind of motivation]. That a person
bom in a certain religion should quietly walk in it
is one thing, and to set out to reaffirm your religion
another. The latter work does not become a man
who has not reached full certainty about it. I have
reflected a lot, with an open mind about Islam. Af¬
ter considerable reflection and thought I became
deeply convinced that if there is any true religion,
it is Islam alone, and I reaffirm Islam on the basis
of this heartfelt certainty, not because I was born
in a Muslim home and because I am Muslim. (Very
loud cheers.)
41
Muhammad Iqbal
Islam as a Mora! and Political Ideal
Muhammad Iqbal (North India, 1877-1938) was a great poet in both the Persian and
Urdu languages and a progressive thinker known as the intellectual father of Pakistan,
Iqbal was bom in Punjab and completed his early studies with a scholar who had been
strongly influenced by Sayyid Ahmad Khan's (chapter 40) Aligarh movement. He later
studied at Government College in Lahore, and then, after teaching Arabic and English at
various Lahore colleges, went to Europe in 1905 for graduate study. He was awarded a
doctorate in philosophy from Munich University in 1907, and also studied law in London
and philosophy at Cambridge University. Upon his return to Punjab, he sporadically prac¬
ticed law while earning fame as a poet and intellectual. He was knighted by the British in
1922 for his contributions to poetry, and was elected to the Punjab legislature in 1927.
His presidential speech to the All-India Muslim League in 1930, arguing that the predomi¬
nantly Muslim regions of North-West India should be governed autonomously under an
Islamic system, is widely credited with inspiring the Pakistan movement, Major themes in
Iqbal's poetry included the decline of Muslim creativity, influence, and authenticity. He
sought to reverse this decline through the promotion of a dynamic and forward-looking
sense of self in contrast to the "ego” criticized in Islamic ethical and mystical literature,
The selection presented here, written early in Iqbal's career, argued for the progressive
and egalitarian nature of Islam, in both the ethical and political realms. 1
There are three points of view from which a religious
system can be approached: the standpoint of the
teacher, that of the expounder, and that of the criti¬
cal student. I do not pretend to be a teacher, whose
thought and action are, or ought to be, in perfect
harmony in so far as he endeavors to work out, in his
own life, the ideals which he places before others,
and thus influences his audience more by example
than by precept. Nor do I claim the high office of an
expounder, who brings to bear a subtle intellect upon
his task, endeavors to explain all the various aspects
of the principles he expounds, and works with cer¬
tain presuppositions, the truth of which he never
questions. The attitude of the mind which character¬
izes a critical student is fundamentally different from
that of the teacher and the expounder. He approaches
Dr. Shaikh Muhammad Iqbal, “Islam as a Moral and Politi¬
cal Ideal,” Hindustan Review , Allahabad, India, July 1909,
pp. 29-38, and August 1909, pp. 166-171. Introduction by
Marcia K. Hermansen.
1. Annemarie Schimmel, Gabriel's Wing: A Study into
the Religious Ideas of Sir Muhammad Iqbal (Leiden, Neth¬
erlands: E. J. Brill, 1963); Annemarie Schimmel, “Ikbal,
Muhammad,” in Bernard Lewis et alia, editors, Encyclope-
the subject of his inquiry free from all presupposi¬
tions, and tries to understand the organic structure of
a religious system, just as a biologist would study a
form of life or a geologist a piece of mineral. His
object is to apply methods of scientific research to
religion, with a view to discover how the various
elements in a given structure fit in with one another,
how each factor functions individually, and how their
relation with one another determines the functional
value of the whole. He looks at the subject from the
standpoint of history and raises certain fundamental
questions with regard to the origin, growth, and for¬
mation of the system he proposes to understand.
What are the historical forces, the operation of which
evoked, as a necessary consequence, the phenome¬
non of a particular system? Why should a particular
religious system be produced by a particular people?
dia of Islam, 2d ed. (Leiden, Netherlands: E. J. Brill; Lon¬
don: Luzac, 1971), volume 3, pp. 1057-1059; Hafeez Malik,
editor, Iqbal, Poet-Philosopher of Pakistan (New York: Co¬
lumbia University Press, 1971); Hafeez Malik, “Iqbal,
Muhammad,” in John L. Esposito, editor, Oxford Encyclo¬
pedia of the Modem Islamic World (New York: Oxford Uni¬
versity Press, 1995), volume 2, pp. 221-224.
304
ISLAM AS A MORAL AND POLITICAL IDEAL 305
What is the real significance of a religious system in
the history of the people who produced it, and in the
history of mankind as a whole? Are there any geo¬
graphical causes which determine the original local¬
ity of a religion? How far does it reveal the inmost
soul of a people, their social, moral, and political
aspirations? What transformation, if any, has it
worked in them? How far has it contributed toward
the realization of the ultimate purpose revealed in the
history of man? These are some of the questions
which the critical student of religion endeavors to
answer, in order to comprehend its structure and to
estimate its ultimate worth as a civilizing agency
among the forces of historical evolution.
I propose to look at Islam from the standpoint of
the critical student. But I may state at the outset that
I shall avoid the use of expressions current in popu¬
lar Revelation Theology, since my method is essen¬
tially scientific and consequently necessitates the use
of terms which can be interpreted in the light of
everyday human experience. For instance, when I say
that the religion of a people is the sum total of their
life experience finding a definite expression through
the medium of a great personality, I am only trans¬
lating the fact of Revelation into the language of
science. Similarly, interaction between individual
and universal energy is only another expression for
the feeling of prayer, which ought to be so described
for purposes of scientific accuracy. It is because I
want to approach my subject from a thoroughly
human standpoint, and not because I doubt the fact
of Divine Revelation as the final basis of all religion,
that I prefer to employ expressions of a more scien¬
tific content. Islam is, moreover, the youngest of all
religions, the last creation of humanity. Its founder
stands out clear before us; he is truly a personage of
history and lends himself freely even to the most
searching criticism. Ingenious legend has weaved no
screens round his figure; he is born in the broad day¬
light of history; we can thoroughly understand the
inner spring of his actions; we can subject his mind
to a keen psychological analysis. Let us then, for the
time being, eliminate the supernatural element and
try to understand the structure of Islam as we find it.
I have just indicated the way in which a critical
student of religion approaches his subject. Now, it
is not possible for me, in the short space at my dis¬
posal, to answer, with regard to Islam, all the ques¬
tions which as a critical student of religion I ought
to raise and answer in order to reveal the real mean¬
ing of this religious system. I shall not raise the ques¬
tion of the origin and the development of Islam. Nor
shall I try to analyze the various currents of thought
in the pre-Islamic Arabian society, which found a
final focus in the utterances of the Prophet of Islam.
I shall confine my attention to the Islamic ideal in its
ethical and political aspects only.
To begin with, we have to recognize that every
great religious system starts with certain propositions
concerning the nature of man and the universe. The
psychological implication of Buddhism, for instance,
is the central fact of pain as a dominating element in
the constitution of the universe. Man, regarded as an
individuality, is helpless against the forces of pain,
according to the teachings of Buddhism. There is an
indissoluble relation between pain and the individual
consciousness, which, as such, is nothing but a con¬
stant possibility of pain. Freedom from pain means
freedom from individuality. Starting from the fact of
pain, Buddhism is quite consistent in placing before
man the ideal of self-destruction. Of the two terms
in this relation, pain and the sense of personality, one
(that is, pain) is ultimate; the other is a delusion from
which it is possible to emancipate ourselves by ceas¬
ing to act on those lines of activity, which have a
tendency to intensify the sense of personality. Sal¬
vation, then, according to Buddhism, is inaction;
renunciation of self and unworldliness are the prin¬
cipal virtues. Similarly, Christianity, as a religious
system, is based on the fact of sin. The world is re¬
garded as evil and the taint of sin is regarded as he¬
reditary to man, who. as an individuality, is insuffi¬
cient and stands in need of some supernatural
personality to intervene between him and his Creator.
Christianity, unlike Buddhism, regards human per¬
sonality as something real, but agrees with Buddhism
in holding that man as a force against sin is insuffi¬
cient. There is, however, a subtle difference in the
agreement. We can, according to Christianity, get rid
of sin by depending upon a Redeemer; we can free
ourselves from pain, according to Buddhism, by let¬
ting this insufficient force dissipate or lose itself in
the universal energy of nature. Both agree in the fact
of insufficiency, and both agree in holding that this
insufficiency is evil; but while the one makes up the
deficiency by bringing in the force of a redeeming
personality, the other prescribes its gradual reduction
until it is annihilated altogether. Again, Zoroastrian¬
ism looks upon nature as a scene of endless struggle
between the powers of evil and the powers of good.
306 Muhammad Iqbal
and recognizes in man the power to choose any course
of action he likes. The universe, according to Zoro¬
astrianism, is partly evil, partly good; man is neither
wholly good nor wholly evil, but a combination of
the two principles—light and darkness continually
fighting against each other for universal supremacy.
We see then that the fundamental presuppositions,
with regard to the nature of the universe and man, in
Buddhism, Christianity, and Zoroastrianism, respec¬
tively, are the following:
(1) There is pain in nature, and man regarded as an
individual is evil (Buddhism).
(2) There is sin in nature, and the taint of sin is fatal
to man (Christianity).
(3) There is struggle in nature; man is a mixture of
the struggling forces and is free to range him¬
self on the side of the powers of good, which
will eventually prevail (Zoroastrianism).
The question now is, what is the Muslim view of
the universe and man? What is the central idea in
Islam which determines the structure of the entire
system? We know that sin, pain, and sorrow are con¬
stantly mentioned in the Qur’an. The truth is that
Islam looks upon the universe as a reality and con¬
sequently recognizes as reality all that is in it. Sin,
pain, sorrow, struggle are certainly real, but Islam
teaches that evil is not essential to the universe; the
universe can be reformed; the elements of sin and evil
can be gradually eliminated. All that is in the universe
is God’s, and the seemingly destructive forces of
nature become sources of life, if properly controlled
by man, who is endowed with the power to under¬
stand and to control them.
These and other similar teachings of the Qur’an,
combined with the Qur’anic recognition of the real¬
ity of sin and sorrow, indicate that the Islamic view
of the universe is neither optimistic nor pessimistic.
Modem psychometry has given the final answer to
the psychological implications of Buddhism. Pain is
not an essential factor in the constitution of the uni¬
verse, and pessimism is only a product of a hostile
social environment. Islam believes in the efficacy of
well-directed action; hence the standpoint of Islam
must be described as melioristic—the ultimate pre¬
supposition and justification of all human effort at
scientific discovery and social progress. Although
Islam recognizes the fact of pain, sin, and struggle
in nature, yet the principal fact which stands in the
way of man’s ethical progress is, according to Islam,
neither pain, nor sin, nor struggle. It is fear, to which
man is a victim owing to his ignorance of the nature
of his environment and want of absolute faith in God.
The highest stage of man’s ethical progress is reached
when he becomes absolutely free from fear and grief.
The central proposition which regulates the struc¬
ture of Islam, then, is that there is fear in nature, and
the object of Islam is to free man from fear. This view
of the universe indicates also the Islamic view of the
metaphysical nature of man. If fear is the force which
dominates man and counteracts his ethical progress,
man must be regarded as a unit of force, an energy, a
will, a germ of infinite power, the gradual unfoldment
of which must be the object of all human activity. The
essential nature of man, then, consists in will, not
intellect or understanding.
With regard to the ethical nature of man, too, the
teaching of Islam is different from those of other re¬
ligious systems. And when God said to the angels,
“I am going to make a Viceroy on the earth,” they
said: “Art Thou creating one who spills blood and
disturbs the peace of the earth, and we glorify Thee
and sing Thy praises?” God answered: “I know what
you do not know.” This verse of the Qur’an [Sura 2,
Verse 30] read in the light of the famous tradition
[hadith, or tradition of the Prophet] that every child
is bom a Muslim (peaceful), indicates that, accord¬
ing to the tenets of Islam, man is essentially good and
peaceful—a view explained and defended, in our
own times, by [Jean-Jacques] Rousseau [French phi¬
losopher, 1712-1778], the great father of modern
political thought. The opposite view, the doctrine of
the depravity of man held by the Church of Rome,
leads to the most pernicious religious and political
consequences. Since if man is elementally wicked,
he must not be permitted to have his own way; his
entire life must be controlled by external authority.
This means priesthood in religion and autocracy in
politics. The Middle Ages in the history of Europe
drove this dogma of Romanism to its political and
religious consequences, and the result was a form of
society which required terrible revolutions to destroy
it and to upset the basic presuppositions of its struc¬
ture. [Martin] Luther [German founder of Protestant
Christianity, 1483-1546], the enemy of despotism in
religion, and Rousseau, the enemy of despotism in
politics, must always be regarded as the emancipa¬
tors of European humanity from the heavy fetters of
Popedom and absolutism, and their religious and
political thought must be understood as a virtual
ISLAM AS A MORAL AND POLITICAL IDEAL 307
denial of the Church dogma of human depravity. The
possibility of the elimination of sin and pain from the
evolutionary process, and faith in the natural good¬
ness of man, are the basic propositions of Islam, as
of modem European civilization, which has, almost
unconsciously, recognized the truth of these propo¬
sitions in spite of the religious system with which it
is associated. Ethically speaking, therefore, man is
naturally good and peaceful. Metaphysically speak¬
ing, he is a unit of energy, which cannot bring out
its dormant possibilities owing to its misconception
of the nature of its environment. The ethical ideal of
Islam is to disenthral man from fear, and thus to give
him a sense of his personality, to make him conscious
of himself as a source of power. This idea of man as
an individuality of infinite power determines, accord¬
ing to the teachings of Islam, the worth of all human
action. That which intensifies the sense of individu¬
ality in man is good, that which enfeebles it is bad.
Virtue is power, force, strength; evil is weakness.
Give man a keen sense of respect for his own per¬
sonality, let him move fearless and free in the immen¬
sity of God’s earth, and he will respect the personali¬
ties of others and become perfectly virtuous. It is not
possible for me to show in the course of this paper how
all the principal forms of vice can be reduced to fear.
But we will now see the reason why certain forms of
human activity, such as self-renunciation, poverty,
slavish obedience which sometimes conceals itself
under the beautiful name of humility and unworldli¬
ness—modes of activity which tend to weaken the
force of human individuality—are regarded as virtues
by Buddhism and Christianity, and altogether ignored
by Islam. While the early Christians glorified in pov¬
erty and unworldliness, Islam looks upon poverty as
a vice, and says: “Do not forget thy share in the world.”
[Qur’an, Sura 28, Verse 77] The highest virtue from
the standpoint of Islam is righteousness, which is de¬
fined by the Qur’an in the following manner:
It is not righteousness that ye turn your faces in
prayers towards east and west, but righteousness is
of him who believeth in God and the last day and
the angels and the scriptures and the prophets, who
give the money for God’s sake unto his kindred and
unto orphans and the needy and to strangers and to
those who ask for the redemption of captives, of
those who are constant at prayer, and of those who
perform their covenant when they have covenanted,
and behave themselves patiently in adversity and in
times of violence. [Sura 2, Verse 177]
It is, therefore, evident that Islam, so to speak,
transmutes the moral values of the ancient world, and
declares the preservation, intensification of the sense
of human personality, to be the ultimate ground of
all ethical activity. Man is a free responsible being;
he is the maker of his own destiny; his salvation is
his own business. There is no mediator between God
and man. God is the birthright of every man. The
Qur’an, therefore, while it looks upon Jesus Christ
as the spirit of God, strongly protests against the
Christian doctrine of Redemption, as well as the
doctrine of an infallible visible head of the Church—
doctrines which proceed upon the assumption of the
insufficiency of human personality and tend to cre¬
ate in man a sense of dependence, which is regarded
by Islam as a force obstructing the ethical progress
of man. The law of Islam is almost unwilling to rec¬
ognize illegitimacy, since the stigma of illegitimacy
is a great blow to the healthy development of inde¬
pendence in man. Similarly, in order to give man an
early sense of individuality, the law of Islam has laid
down that a child is an absolutely free human being
at the age of fifteen.
To this view of Muslim ethics, however, there can
be one objection. If the development of human indi¬
viduality is the principal concern of Islam, why
should it tolerate the institution of slavery? The idea
of free labor was foreign to the economic conscious¬
ness of the ancient world. Aristotle [Greek philoso¬
pher, 384-322 b.c.] looks upon it as a necessary fac¬
tor in human society. The Prophet of Islam, being a
link between the ancient and the modem world, de¬
clared the principle of equality and though, like
every wise reformer, he slightly conceded to the
social conditions around him in retaining the name
slavery, he quietly took away the whole spirit of this
institution. That slaves had equal opportunity with
other Muhammadans is evidenced by the fact that
some of the greatest Muslim warriors, kings, pre¬
miers, scholars, and jurists were slaves. During the
days of the early caliphs, slavery by purchase was
quite unknown; part of public revenue was set apart
for purposes of manumission, and prisoners of war
were either freely dismissed or freed on the payment
of ransom. ‘Umar [ibn al-Khattab, second caliph,
634-644] set all slaves at liberty after his conquest
of Jerusalem. Slaves were also set at liberty as a pen¬
alty for culpable homicide and in expiation of a false
oath taken by mistake. The Prophet’s own treatment
of slaves was extraordinarily liberal. The proud ads-
308 Muhammad Iqbal
tocratic Arab could not tolerate the social elevation
of a slave, even when he was manumitted. The demo¬
cratic ideal of perfect equality, which had found the
most uncompromising expression in the Prophet’s
life, could only be brought home to an extremely
aristocratic people by a very cautious handling of the
situation. He brought about a marriage between an
emancipated slave and a free Quraysh woman, a rela¬
tive of his own [tribe]. This marriage was a blow to
the aristocratic pride of this free Arab woman; she
could not get on with her husband, and the result was
a divorce, which made her the more helpless, since
no respectable Arab would marry the divorced wife
of a slave. The ever-watchful Prophet availed him¬
self of this situation and turned it to account in his
efforts at social reform. He married the woman him¬
self, indicating thereby that not only a slave could
marry a free woman, but also a woman divorced by
him could become the wife of a man no less than the
greatest Prophet of God. The significance of this
marriage in the history of social reform in Arabia is,
indeed, great. Whether prejudice, ignorance, or want
of insight has blinded European critics of Islam to
the real meaning of this union, it is difficult to guess.
In order to show the treatment of slaves by mod¬
em Muhammadans, I quote a passage from the En¬
glish translation of the autobiography of the late Amir
‘Abd al-Rahman of Afghanistan [reigned 1880-1901]:
“For instance,” says the amir, “Framurz Khan, a
Chitrali slave, is my most trusted Commander-in-Chief
at Herat, Nazir Muhammad Safar Khan, another
Chitrali slave, is the most trusted official of my Court;
he keeps my seal in his hand to put to any document
and to my food and diet; in short he has the full con¬
fidence of my life, as well as my kingdom is in his
hands. Parwana Khan, the late Deputy Commander-
in-Chief, and Jan Muhammad Khan, the late Lord of
Treasury, two of the highest officials of the kingdom
in their lifetime, were both of them my slaves.”
The truth is that the institution of slavery is a mere
name in Islam, and the idea of individuality reveals
itself as a guiding principle in the entire system of
Muhammadan law and ethics.
Briefly speaking, then, a strong will in a strong
body is the ethical ideal of Islam. But let me stop here
for a moment and see whether we, Indian Musalmans
[Muslims], are true to this ideal. Does the Indian
Muslim possess a strong will in a strong body? Has
he got the will to live? Has he got sufficient strength
of character to oppose those forces which tend to
disintegrate the social organism to which he belongs?
I regret to answer my questions in the negative. The
reader will understand that in the great struggle for
existence it is not principally number which makes
a social organism survive. Character is the ultimate
equipment of man, not only in his efforts against a
hostile natural environment, but also in his contest
with kindred competitors after a fuller, richer, am¬
pler life. The life-force of the Indian Muhammadan,
however, has become woefully enfeebled. The decay
of the religious spirit, combined with other causes of
a political nature over which he had no control, has
developed in him a habit of self-dwarfing, a sense of
dependence, and, above all, that laziness of spirit
which an enervated people call by the dignified name
of “contentment” in order to conceal their own en-
feeblement. Owing to his indifferent commercial
morality, he fails in economic enterprise; for want of
a true conception of national interest and a right ap¬
preciation of the present situation of his community
among the communities of this country, he is work¬
ing, in his private as well as public capacity, on lines
which, I am afraid, must lead him to ruin. How often
do we see that he shrinks from advocating a cause,
the significance of which is truly national, simply
because his standing aloof pleases an influential
Hindu, through whose agency he hopes to secure a
personal distinction? I unhesitatingly declare that I
have greater respect for an illiterate shopkeeper, who
earns his honest bread and has sufficient force in his
arms to defend his wife and children in times of
trouble, than the brainy graduate of high culture,
whose low, timid voice betokens the dearth of soul
in his body, who takes pride in his submissiveness,
eats sparingly, complains of sleepless nights, and
produces unhealthy children for his community, if he
does produce any at all. I hope I shall not be offend¬
ing the reader when I say that I have a certain amount
of admiration for the devil. By refusing to prostrate
himself before Adam, whom he honestly believed to
be his inferior, he revealed a high sense of self-
respect, a trait of character which, in my opinion,
ought to redeem him from his spiritual deformity, just
as the beautiful eyes of the toad redeem him from his
physical repulsiveness. And I believe God punished
him not because he refused to make himself low be¬
fore the progenitor of an enfeebled humanity, but
because he declined to give absolute obedience to the
will of the Almighty Ruler of the Universe. The ideal
of our educated young men is mostly [government]
ISLAM AS A MORAL AND POLITICAL IDEAL 309
service, and service begets, specially in a country like
India, that sense of dependence which undermines
the force of human individuality. The poor among
us have, of course, no capital; the middle class people
cannot undertake joint economic enterprise owing to
mutual mistrust; and the rich look upon trade as an
occupation beneath their dignity. Truly, economic
dependence is the prolific mother of all the various
forms of vice. Even the vices of the Indian Muham¬
madan indicate the weakness of life-force in him.
Physically, too, he has undergone dreadful deterio¬
ration. If one sees the pale, faded faces of Muham¬
madan boys in schools and colleges, one will find the
painful verification of my statement. Power, energy,
force, strength, yes physical strength, is the law of
life. A strong man may rob others when he has got
nothing in his own pocket; but a feeble person, he
must die the death of a mean thing in the world’s
awful scene of continual warfare.
But how [to] improve this undesirable state of
things? Education, we are told, will work the required
transformation. I may say at once that I do not put
much faith in education as a means of ethical train¬
ing—I mean education as understood in this coun¬
try. The ethical training of humanity is really the
work of great personalities, who appear, from time
to time, during the course of human history. Unfor¬
tunately, our present social environment is not favor¬
able to the birth and growth of such personalities of
ethical magnetism. An attempt to discover the rea¬
son of this dearth of personalities among us will ne¬
cessitate a subtle analysis of all the visible and in¬
visible forces which are now determining the course
of our social evolution—an enquiry which I cannot
undertake in this paper. But all unbiased persons will
easily admit that such personalities are now rare
among us. This being the case, education is the only
thing to fall back upon. But what sort of education?
There is no absolute truth in education, as there is
none in philosophy or science. Knowledge for the
sake of knowledge is a maxim of fools. Do we ever
find a person rolling in his mind the undulatory
[wave] theory of light simply because it is a fact of
science? Education, like other things, ought to be
determined by the needs of the learner. A form of
education which has no direct bearing on the particu¬
lar type of character which you want to develop is
absolutely worthless. I grant that the present system
of education in India gives us bread and butter. We
manufacture a number of graduates, and then we have
to send titled mendicants to government to beg ap¬
pointments for them. Well, if we succeed in secur¬
ing a few appointments in the higher branches of
service, what then? It is the masses who constitute
the backbone of the nation; they ought to be better
fed, better housed, and properly educated. Life is not
bread and butter alone; it is something more; it is a
healthy character reflecting the national ideal in all
its aspects. And for a truly national character, you
ought to have a truly national education. Can you
expect free Muslim character in a young boy who is
brought up in an aided [that is, Christian] school and
in complete ignorance of his social and historical
tradition? You administer to him doses of [Oliver]
Cromwell’s history [English republican leader,
1599-1658]; it is idle to expect that he will turn out
a truly Muslim character. The knowledge of
Cromwell’s history will certainly create in him a
great deal of admiration for that Puritan revolution¬
ary; but it cannot create that healthy pride in his soul
which is the very lifeblood of a truly national char¬
acter. Our educated young man knows all about [the
Duke of] Wellington [English military hero, 1769—
1852] and [William] Gladstone [English prime min¬
ister, 1809-1898], [Frangois Marie] Voltaire [French
philosopher, 1694-1778] and Luther. He will tell you
that Lord [Frederick] Roberts [English general,
1832-1914] worked in the South African War like a
common soldier at the age of 80 [actually 68]; but
how many of us know that Muhammad II [Mehmet
Fatih, Ottoman caliph, 1432-1481] conquered
Constantinople at the age of 22? How many of us
have even the faintest notion of the influence of our
Muslim civilization over the civilization of modern
Europe! How many of us are [familiar] with the
wonderful historical productions of Ibn Khaldun
[Tunisian historian, 1332-1406] or the extraordinar¬
ily noble character of the great Mir ‘ Abd al-Qadir [ibn
Muhyi al-Din] of Algeria [anticolonial leader, 1808-
1883; see chapter 15]? A living nation is living be¬
cause it never forgets its dead. I venture to say that
the present system of education in this country is not
at all suited to us as a people. It is not true to our
genius as a nation, it tends to produce an un-Muslim
type of character, it is not determined by our national
requirements, it breaks entirely with our past, and it
appears to proceed on the false assumption that the
idea of education is the training of human intellect
rather than human will. Nor is this superficial sys¬
tem true to the genius of the Hindus. Among them it
3 10 Muhammad Iqbal
appears to have produced a number of political ide¬
alists, whose false reading of history drives them to
the upsetting of all conditions of political order and
social peace. We spend an immense amount of
money every year on the education of our children.
Well, thanks to the King-Emperor [Edward VII of
Great Britain, reigned 1901-1910], India is a free
country; everybody is free to entertain any opinion
he likes—I look upon it as a waste. In order to be truly
ourselves, we ought to have our own schools, our
own colleges, and our own universities, keeping alive
our social and historical tradition, making us good
and peaceful citizens and creating in us that free but
law-abiding spirit which evolves out of itself the
noblest types of political virtue. I am quite sensible
of the difficulties that lie in our way; all that I can
say is that if we cannot get over our difficulties, the
world will soon get rid of us.
Having discussed in the last issue of this Review the
ethical ideals of Islam, I now proceed to say a few
words on the political aspect of the Islamic ideal.
Before, however, I come to the subject, I wish to
meet an objection against Islam so often brought
forward by our European critics. It has been said that
Islam is a religion which implies a state of war and
can thrive only in a state of war. Now there can be
no denying that war is an expression of the energy
of a nation; a nation which cannot fight cannot hold
its own in the strain and stress of selective compe¬
tition which constitutes an indispensable condition
of all human progress. Defensive war is certainly
permitted by the Qur’an; but the doctrine of aggres¬
sive war against unbelievers is wholly unauthorized
by the Holy Book of Islam. Here are the words of
the [Qur’an]:
Summon them to the way of thy Lord with wisdom
and kindly warning, dispute them in the kindest
manner. Say to those who have been given the book
and to the ignorant: Do you accept Islam? Then, if
they accept Islam, they are guided aright; but if they
turn away, then thy duty is only preaching; and
God’s eye is on His servants. [Sura 3, Verse 20]
All the wars undertaken during the lifetime of the
Prophet were defensive. His war against the Roman
Empire in 628 a.d. began by a fatal breach of inter¬
national law on the part of the government at Con¬
stantinople, who killed the innocent Arab envoy sent
to their court. Even in defensive war [the Prophet]
forbids wanton cruelty to the vanquished. I quote here
the touching words which he addressed to his follow¬
ers when they were starting for a fight:
In avenging the injuries inflicted upon us, disturb not
the harmless votaries of domestic seclusion, spare the
weakness of the female sex, injure not the infant at
the breast, or those who are ill in bed. Abstain from
demolishing the dwellings of the unresisting
inhabitants, destroy not the means of their subsistence,
nor their fruit trees, and touch not the palm.
The history of Islam tells us that the expansion
of Islam as a religion is in no way related to the po¬
litical power of its followers. The greatest spiritual
conquests of Islam were made during the days of
our political decrepitude. When the rude barbarians
of Mongolia drowned in blood the civilization of
Baghdad in 1258 a.d., when the Muslim power fell
in Spain and the followers of Islam were mercilessly
killed or driven out of Cordova by Ferdinand [III,
king of Castile and Leon, died 1252] in 1236, Islam
had just secured a footing in Sumatra and was about
to work the peaceful conversion of the Malay Archi¬
pelago. “In the hours of its political degradation,” says
Professor [Thomas Walker] Arnold [1864-1930],
“Islam has achieved some of its most brilliant con¬
quests. On two great historical occasions, infidel
barbarians have set their foot on the necks of the
followers of the Prophet, the Seljuk Turks in the
eleventh and the Mongols in the thirteenth century,
and in each case the conquerors have accepted the
religion of the conquered.” “We undoubtedly find,”
says the same learned scholar elsewhere, “that Islam
gained its greatest and most lasting missionary tri¬
umphs in times and places in which its political
power has been weakest, as in South India and East¬
ern Bengal.”
The truth is that Islam is essentially a religion of
peace. All forms of political and social disturbance
are condemned by the Qur’ an in the most uncompro¬
mising terms. I quote a few verses from the Qur'an:
Eat and drink from what God has given you, and run
not on the face of the earth in the manner of rebels.
[Sura 2, Verse 60]
And disturb not the peace of the earth after it has
been reformed; this is good for you if you are be¬
lievers. [Sura 7, Verse 85]
And do good to others as God has done good to thee,
and seek not the violation of peace in the earth, for
ISLAM AS A MORAL AND POLITICAL IDEAL 3 I I
God does not love those who break the peace. [Sura
28, Verse 77]
That is the home in the next world which We build
for those who do not mean rebellion and disturbance
in the earth, and the end is for those who fear God.
[Sura 28, Verse 83]
Those who rebelled in cities and enhanced disorder
in them, God visited them with His whip of punish¬
ment. [Sura 89, Verses 11-13]
One sees from these verses how severely all forms
of political and social disorder are denounced by the
Qur’an. But the Qur’an is not satisfied with mere
denunciation of the evil of fasad [corruption]. It goes
to the very root of this evil. We know that both in
ancient and modem times, secret meetings have been
a constant source of political and social unrest. Here
is what the Qur’an says about such conferences: “O
believers, if you converse secretly—that is to say,
hold secret conference—converse not for purpose of
sin and rebellion.” [Sura 58, Verse 9] The ideal of
Islam is to secure social peace at any cost. All meth¬
ods of violent change in society are condemned in
the most unmistakable language. [Ibn Abi Randaqa
Abu Bakr] Tartushi—a Muslim lawyer of Spain
[circa 1059-1126]—is quite true to the spirit of
Islam when he says: “Forty years of tyranny are bet¬
ter than one hour of anarchy.” “Listen to him and
obey him,” says the Prophet of God in a tradition
mentioned by [Muhammad ibn Isma’il] Bukhari
[hadith collector, 810-870], “even if a Negro slave
is appointed to rule over you.” Muslim [ibn al-Hajjaj,
hadith collector, 821-875] mentions another im¬
portant tradition of the Prophet on the authority of
‘Arfaja [ibn Harthama al-Bariki, a companion of the
Prophet], who says: “I heard the Prophet of God say,
‘When you have agreed to follow one man, then if
another man comes forward intending to break your
stick (weaken your strength) or to make you disperse
in disunion, kill him.’”
Those among us who make it their business to
differ from the general body of Muslims in political
views ought to read this tradition carefully, and if
they have any respect for the words of the Prophet,
it is their duty to dissuade themselves from this mean
traffic in political opinion which, though perhaps it
brings a little personal gain to them, is exceedingly
harmful to the interests of the community. My ob¬
ject, in citing these verses and traditions, is to edu¬
cate political opinion on strictly Islamic lines. In this
country we are living under a Christian government.
We must always keep before our eyes the example
of those early Muhammadans who, persecuted by
their own countrymen, had to leave their home and
to settle in the Christian state of Abyssinia. How they
behaved in that land must be our guiding principle
in this country, where an overdose of Western ideas
has taught people to criticize the existing government
with a dangerous lack of historical perspective. And
our relations with the Christians are determined for
us by the Qur’an, which says:
And thou wilt find nearer to the friendship of the
believers those men who call themselves Christians.
This is because among them there are learned
men and hermits, and they are never vain. [Sura 5,
Verse 82]
Having thus established that Islam is a religion of
peace, I now proceed to consider the purely political
aspect of the Islamic ideal—the ideal of Islam as
entertained by a corporate individuality. Given a
settled society, what does Islam expect from its fol¬
lowers regarded as a community? What principles
ought to guide them in the management of commu¬
nal affairs? What must be their ultimate object, and
how is it to be achieved? We know that Islam is
something more than a creed, it is also a community,
a nation. The membership of Islam as a community
is not determined by birth, locality, or naturalization;
it consists in the identity of belief. The expression
“Indian Muhammadan,” however convenient it may
be, is a contradiction in terms, since Islam in its es¬
sence is above all conditions of time and space. Na¬
tionality with us is a pure idea; it has no geographi¬
cal basis. But inasmuch as the average man demands
a material center of nationality, the Muslim looks for
it in the holy town of Mecca, so that the basis of
Muslim nationality combines the real and the ideal,
the concrete and the abstract. When, therefore, it is
said that the interests of Islam are superior to those
of the Muslim, it is meant that the interests of the
individual as a unit are subordinate to the interests
of the community as an external symbol of the Is¬
lamic principle. This is the only principle which lim¬
its the liberty of the individual, who is otherwise
absolutely free. The best form of government for such
a community would be democracy, the ideal of which
is to let man develop all the possibilities of his na¬
ture by allowing him as much freedom as practicable.
The caliph of Islam is not an infallible being; like
3 12 Muhammad Iqbal
other Muslims he is subject to the same law; he is
elected by the people and is deposed by them if he
goes contrary to the law. An ancestor of the present
sultan of Turkey was sued in an ordinary law court
by a mason, who succeeded in getting him fined by
the town qadi [judge]. Democracy, then, is the most
important aspect of Islam regarded as a political ideal.
It must, however, be confessed that the Muslims, with
their ideal of individual freedom, could do nothing
for the political improvement of Asia. Their democ¬
racy lasted only thirty years and disappeared with
their political expansion. Though the principle of
election was not quite original in Asia (since the
ancient Parthian Government was based on the same
principle), yet somehow or other it was not suited to
the nations of Asia in the early days of Islam. It was,
however, reserved for a Western nation politically to
vitalize the countries of Asia. Democracy has been
the great mission of England in modern times, and
English statesmen have boldly carried this principle
to countries which have been, for centuries, groan¬
ing under the most atrocious forms of despotism. The
British Empire is a vast political organism, the vital¬
ity of which consists in the gradual working out of
this principle. The permanence of the British Empire
as a civilizing factor in the political evolution of
mankind is one of our greatest interests. This vast
Empire has our fullest sympathy and respect, since
it is one aspect of our political ideal that is being
slowly worked out in it. England, in fact, is doing one
of our own great duties, which unfavorable circum¬
stances did not permit us to perform. It is not the
number of Muhammadans which it protects, but the
spirit of the British Empire that makes it the greatest
Muhammadan Empire in the world.
To return now to the political constitution of the
Muslim society. Just as there are two basic pro¬
positions underlying Muslim ethics, so there are
two basic propositions underlying Muslim political
constitution:
(1) The law of God is absolutely supreme. Author¬
ity, except as an interpreter of the law, has no place
in the social structure of Islam. Islam has a horror of
personal authority. We regard it as inimical to the
unfoldment of human individuality. The Shi'is, of
course, differ from the Sunnis in this respect. They
hold that the caliph or imam [in Shi'i Islam, a divinely
inspired descendant of the Prophet] is appointed by
God and his interpretation of the law is final; he is
infallible and his authority, therefore, is absolutely
supreme. There is certainly a grain of truth in this
view; since the principle of absolute authority has
functioned usefully in the course of the history of
mankind. But it must be admitted that the idea works
well in the case of primitive societies and reveals its
deficiency when applied to higher stages of civiliza¬
tion. Peoples grow out of it, as recent events [the
Constitutional Revolution of 1906] have revealed in
Persia, which is a Shi‘i country, yet demands a fun¬
damental structural change in her government in the
introduction of the principle of election.
(2) The absolute equality of all the members of
the community. There is no aristocracy in Islam.
“The noblest among you,” says the Prophet, “are
those who fear God most.” There is no privileged
class, no priesthood, no caste system. Islam is a
unity in which there is no distinction, and this unity
is secured by making men believe in the two simple
propositions—the unity of God and the mission of
the Prophet—propositions which are certainly of a
supernational character, but which, based as they
are on the general religious experience of mankind,
are intensely true to the average human nature. Now,
this principle of the equality of all believers made
early Musalmans the greatest political power in the
world. Islam worked as a leveling force; it gave the
individual a sense of his inward power; it elevated
those who were socially low. The elevation of the
downtrodden was the chief secret of the Muslim
political power in India. The result of the British
rule in this country has been exactly the same; and
if England continues true to this principle, it will
ever remain a source of strength to her as it was to
her predecessors.
But are we Indian Musalmans true to this principle
in our social economy? Is the organic unity of Islam
intact in this land? Religious adventurers set up dif¬
ferent sects and fraternities, ever quarreling with one
another; and then there are castes and subcastes like
the Hindus! Surely we have out-Hinducd the Hindu
himself; we are suffering from a double caste sys¬
tem—the religious caste system, sectarianism, and
the social caste system, which we have either learned
or inherited from the Hindus. This is one of the quiet
ways in which conquered nations revenge themselves
on their conquerors. I condemn this accursed reli¬
gious and social sectarianism; I condemn it in the
name of God, in the name of humanity, in the name
of Moses, in the name of Jesus Christ, and in the name
of him—a thrill of emotion passes through the very
ISLAM AS A MORAL AND POLITICAL IDEAL 3 13
fiber of my soul when I think of that exalted name—
yes, in the name of him who brought the final mes¬
sage of freedom and equality to mankind. Islam is
one and indivisible; it brooks no distinctions in it.
There are no Wahhabis, Shi'is, Mirza’is, or Sunnis
in Islam. Fight not for the interpretations of the truth,
when the truth itself is in danger. It is foolish to com¬
plain of stumbling when you walk in the darkness of
night. Let all come forward and contribute their re¬
spective shares in the great toil of the nation. Let the
idols of class distinctions and sectarianism be
smashed forever; let the Musalmans of the country
be once more united into a great vital whole. How
can we, in the presence of violent internal dispute,
expect to succeed in persuading others to our way of
thinking? The work of freeing humanity from super¬
stition—the ultimate ideal of Islam as a community,
for the realization of which we have done so little in
this great land of myth and superstition—will ever
remain undone if the emancipators themselves are
becoming gradually enchained in the very fetters
from which it is their mission to set others free.
42
Muhammad Abdul Khader Maulavi
Islam Is a Religion That
Respects Reason
Muhammad Abdul Khader Maulavi (Malabar, 1873-1932), commonly known as Wakkom
Maulavi, was the seminal modernist reformer of the Mappila Muslims of south India.
Educated at home in a strong intellectual environment maintained by his merchant fa¬
ther, he inherited the latter's wealth in 1902 but not his business acumen, and was poor
at his death. During his lifetime he launched four journals. The first, Swadeshabhimani
(The Patriot 1905-1910), was closed down because of its daring attacks on the ruling
political structures of the region. His other journals— Muslim (1906-1917); the short¬
lived al-lslam (1918, in Arabic-Malayalam); and Deepika (The Torch, 1931-1932)—cen¬
tered on educational and theological reform. In addition, he was indefatigable in organiz¬
ing local Muslim associations dedicated to secular education, including women’s education.
Influenced by Muhammad ‘Abduh (see chapter 3), Muhammad Rashid Rida's journal al-
Manar (The Beacon ) (see chapter 6), and reformers of earlier centuries, Wakkom Maulavi
launched his own call for return to what he considered genuine Islam, which included
the centrality of the Qur’an and tawhid (unity), reinterpreted in the light of modem needs,
This return involved the overcoming of ignorance, taqlid (imitation of past scholars), the
veneration of saints, and other popular religious practices. He passed on his reformist
vision to Mappila political and educational leaders of the following generation, and to
progressive movements such as the Aikhya Sankam Society and the Mujahids. Criticized
by some as a modernist "strayer," Wakkom Maulavi is praised by many as the father of
the Mappila renaissance, 1
Islam is a religion that is compatible with reason; that
is, it has no principles that contradict reason. The
detailed matters of a bygone era that are improbable
and difficult to interpret rationally will be judged by
reason to be invalid. The basic approach of the reli¬
gion is this; If one perceives in the Qur’an and the
hadith [narratives of the Prophet] some words with
an apparent meaning that seems unlikely, one must
conclude that another interpretation is intended, an
interpretation that does not contradict reason. There
are two opinions among the ‘ulama ’ [religious schol¬
ars] regarding such passages. The first holds that
while such words must have a meaning that does not
conflict with reason, it may be hard for us to grasp
their real significance, and we should leave the mat¬
ter to God. That is the view of the early ‘ulama’
(salafiya [pious early Muslims]). The opinion of later
‘ulama’, however, is this: Having first expounded the
passage on the basis of correct linguistic principles,
one must then determine a meaning that is not con¬
trary to reason. In short, if one senses that there is a
contradiction between reason and the customary
view, in choosing between the alternatives stated
above, one must allow reason to decide the issue.
As we have stated earlier, Islam establishes be¬
liefs that have the quality of being fitting for a goal.
Wakkom Muhammad Abdul Khader Maulavi, “Islam Bud-
dhiye Acarikkunna Matumakunnu” (Islam Is a Religion that
Respects Reason), in Wakkam Maulaviyute Tiranynyetutta
Krtikul (Selected Writings of Wakkom Maulavi ) (Wakkom,
India; Wakkom Maulavi Publications, 1979), pp. 133-135.
First published in 1915. Translation from Malayalam and
introduction by Roland E. Miller.
1. M. Muhammadukunnu, Wakkom Maulavi (Kottayam,
India: National Book Stall, 1981); S. Sharafuddeen, Vakkom
Maulavi, A Study (Trivandrum, India: Samkramana Pusthaka
Chakram, 1983); M. Abdul Samad, Islam in Kerala (Kollam,
India: Laurel Publications, 1998); Roland E. Miller, The
Mappila Muslims of Kerala, rev. ed. (Madras, India: Orient
Longman, 1992).
314
ISLAM RESPECTS REASON 3 15
A faith that is based either on a guess or without an
appropriate purpose is one that insults both the faith
itself and the believers. [The Qur’an says:] “They
have no certainty about that. They only follow a
guess. Guesswork has no value for knowing the
truth.” (Sura 53, Verse 28) 2 Islam strongly criticizes
the words and the actions of past ancestors who
closed their eyes and believed and practiced without
discriminating between good and evil. “And when
it is said to them, ‘Come and believe God and God’s
Messenger,’ they say, ‘We will follow only the reli¬
gion of our forefathers.’ What! Will they only fol¬
low that even if their forefathers knew nothing and
had not found the way of truth?” [Sura 2, Verse 170]
With great intentionality Islam teaches that we should
both examine and consider this universe and its
2. [Wakkom Maulavi’s Qur’anic citations are free ren¬
derings in Malayalam.—Trans.]
principles. Moreover, it praises those who think in
this way. “Tell me what is in the heavens and the
earth.” (Qur’an) [Sura 2, Verse 33] “Do they not
look and consider all the realities that God has cre¬
ated in the heavens and the earth?” (Sura 7, Verse
185) “For those who remember God, whether stand¬
ing, sitting, or lying, in the creation of the heavens
and the earth, and in the alternation of night and day,
there are many signs.” (Sura 3, Verse 190) [con¬
flated with Verse 191] Islam sharply condemns ig¬
norant people who do not use their reason to know
the essential meaning of things. “They have hearts,
but no knowledge; they have eyes but do not see.
They have ears, but they do not hear. They are like
animals. Worse than that, they have erred and gone
astray.” [Sura 7, Verse 179]
43
Ameer ‘Ali
The Spirit of Islam (1922)
Ameer Ali (Bengal, 1849-1928) was one of the most influential modernists and apolo¬
gists of Muslim India, His fame was due in part to the fact that he wrote in English, ex¬
plaining Muslim history to Western and Westernized intellectuals, Bom to a Shi'i family
in Chinsura, Bengal, Ameer Ali studied law in England, where he was called to the bar in
1873. He had a distinguished legal and judicial career in British India and served on the
Bengal high court. After retiring in 1904, he moved to England, where he served as the
first Indian member of the judicial Council of the Privy Council in London. He took an
interest in Islamic political causes as well, establishing the London branch of the All-India
Muslim League in 1908 and writing to the Turkish government in 1923 to support the
restoration of the Ottoman caliph's authority. The Turkish Parliament, however, viewed
this as foreign interference and voted to abolish the caliphate permanently in 1924. In
the following passage, selected from the revised edition of Ameer All's most well known
work, The Spirit of Islam , Ali depicts Islamic rule as enlightened and progressive, at its
best, One may note evidence of Ameer 'All's Shi'a background in his praise of the Prophet’s
family and his footnoting of Shi'i sources. However, scholars have also noted that Ameer
'Ali praises orthodox Sunni caliphs as well, and that he develops a political theory com¬
bining the “apostolic" Shi'i imamate and the “pontifical” Sunni caliphate. 1
We have already referred to the Arabian Prophet’s
devotion to knowledge and science as distinguish¬
ing him from all other Teachers, and bringing him
into the closest affinity with the modern world of
thought, Medina, the seat of the theocratic common¬
wealth of Islam, had after the fall of Mecca become
the center of attraction, not to the hosts of Arabia
only, but also to inquirers from abroad. Here flocked
the Persian, the Greek, the Syrian, the Iraqi, and
African of diverse hues and nationalities from the
north and the west. Some, no doubt, came from cu¬
riosity, but most came to seek knowledge and to lis¬
ten to the words of the Prophet of Islam. He preached
of the value of knowledge:
Acquire knowledge, because he who acquires it in the
way of the Lord performs an act of piety ; who speaks
of it, praises the Lord; who seeks it, adores God; who
dispenses instruction in it, bestows alms; and who
imparts it to its fitting objects, performs an act of
devotion to God. Knowledge enables its possessor to
distinguish what is forbidden from what is not; it
lights the way to Heaven; it is our friend in the
desert, our society in solitude, our companion when
bereft of friends; it guides us to happiness; it sus¬
tains us in misery; it is our Ornament in the
company of friends; it serves as an armor against
our enemies. With knowledge, the servant of God
rises to the heights of goodness and to a noble
position, associates with sovereigns in this world, and
attains to the perfection of happiness in the next. 2
Ameer Ali, The Spirit of Islam, Revised Edition (London,
England: Christophers, 1922), pp. 360-373, 399A02. Intro¬
duction by Marcia K. Hermansen.
1. K. K. Aziz, Ameer Ali: His Life and Work (Lahore,
Pakistan: Publishers United, 1968); Martin Forward, The
Failure of Islamic Modernism? Syed Ameer 'All's Interpre¬
tation of Islam (Bern, Switzerland: Peter Lang, 1999); Gail
Minault, “Ameer Ali, Syed," in John L. Esposito, editor,
Oxford Encyclopedia of the Modern Islamic World (New
York: Oxford University Press, 1995), volume 1, pp. 84-85;
W. Cantwell Smith, “Amir Ali,” in H. A. R. Gibb et alia.
editors. Encyclopedia of Islam, 2d ed. (Leiden, Netherlands:
E. J. Brill; London: Luzac, 1960), pp. 442-443.
2. Tradition from the Bihar al-anwar [Oceans of Light] of
Mulla Baqir ibn Muhammad Taqi al-Majlisi [1628-1699],
volume 1, chapter on “Knowledge," handed down by the Imam
Ja'far al-Sadiq [descendant of the Prophet, 699-765], also
quoted from Mu'adh ibn Jabal [companion of the Prophet] in
the Mustatraf [Spiritual Discoveries, by Muhammad Ibshihi,
circa 1388-1446], chapter 4; also in the Kashf al-zunun [Clari¬
fication of Uncertainties] of Haji Khalifa [Katib felebi, 1609-
1657], [Gustav] Fliigel’s edition [of 1835-1858], p. 44.
316
THE SPIRIT OF ISLAM 317
He would often say, “The ink of the scholar is more
holy than the blood of the martyr,” and repeatedly
impress on his disciples the necessity of seeking for
knowledge “even unto China.” 3 “He who leaves his
home in search of knowledge, walks in the path of
God.” “He who travels in search of knowledge, to
him God shows the way to paradise.” 4
The Qur’an itself bears testimony to the supreme
value of learning and science. Commenting on the Sura
al-‘Alaq, 5 [Abu’l-Qasim Mahmud al-]Zamakhshari
[1075-1144] thus explains the meaning of the Qur’anic
words:
God taught human beings that which they did not
know, and this testifieth to the greatness of His
beneficence, for He has given to His servants
knowledge of that which they did not know. And
He has brought them out of the darkness of igno¬
rance to the light of knowledge, and made them
aware of the inestimable blessings of the knowledge
of writing, for great benefits accrue therefrom which
God alone compasseth; and without the knowledge
of writing no other knowledge could be compre¬
hended, nor the sciences placed within bounds, nor
the history of the ancients be acquired and their
sayings be recorded, nor the revealed books be
written; and if that knowledge did not exist, the
affairs of religion and the world, could not be
regulated.
Up to the time of the Islamic Dispensation, the
Arab world, properly so called, restricted within the
peninsula of Arabia and some outlying tracts to the
northwest and the northeast, had shown no signs of
intellectual growth. Poetry, oratory, and judicial as¬
trology formed the favorite objects of pursuit among
the pre-Islamic Arabs. Science and literature pos¬
sessed no votaries. But the words of the Prophet gave
a new impulse to the awakened energies of the race.
Even within his lifetime was formed the nucleus of
an educational institution, which in after years grew
into universities at Baghdad and Salerno, at Cairo and
Cordova. Here preached the Master himself on the
cultivation of a holy spirit: “One hour’s meditation
on the work of the Creator (in a devout spirit) is bet¬
ter than 70 years of prayer.” 6 “To listen to the instruc¬
3. Misbah al-shari'a [The Lamp of the Shari'a , by Ja‘far
al-Sadiq],
4. Jami' al-akhbar [Comprehensive Collection of the
Reports, by Muhammad Ibn Babawayh, 918-991].
5. Qur’an, Sura 96; see also other suras.
6. Jami‘ al-akhbar.
tions of science and learning for one hour is more
meritorious than attending the funerals of a thousand
martyrs—more meritorious than standing up in
prayer for a thousand nights”; “To the student who
goes forth in quest of knowledge, God will allot a
high place in the mansions of bliss ; every step he
takes is blessed, and every lesson he receives has its
reward”; “The seeker of knowledge will be greeted
in Heaven with a welcome from the angels”; “To lis¬
ten to the words of the learned, and to instil into the
heart the lessons of science, is better than religious
exercises,... better than emancipating a hundred
slaves”; “Him who favors learning and the learned,
God will favor in the next world”; “He who honors
the learned honors me.” ‘Ali [ibn Abi Talib, caliph,
656-661] lectured on branches of learning most
suited to the wants of the infant commonwealth.
Among his recorded sayings are the following: “Emi¬
nence in science is the highest of honors”; “He dies
not who gives life to learning”; “The greatest orna¬
ment of a man is erudition.”
Naturally such sentiments on the part of the Mas¬
ter [Muhammad] and the chief of the Disciples [‘Ali]
gave rise to a liberal policy, and animated all classes
with a desire for learning. The art of Kufic writing,
which had just been acquired by a disciple at Hira,
furthered the primitive development of the Muslims.
It was, however, preeminently an age of earnestness
and faith, marked by the uprise of the soul against
the domination of aimless, lifeless philosophy. The
practice of religion, the conservation of a devotional
spirit, and the special cultivation of those branches
of learning which were of practical value in the battle
of everyday life, were the primary objects of the
Muslim’s attention.
The age of speculation was soon to commence;
its germs were contained in the positive precepts of
the Master; and even whilst he was working, the
scholarly Disciple was thinking. The Master had him¬
self declared that whosoever desired to realize the
spirit of his teachings must listen to the words of the
Scholar [‘Ali]. 7 Who more able to grasp the mean¬
ing of the Master’s words than ‘Ali, the beloved
friend, the trusted Disciple, the devoted cousin and
son? The gentle, calm teachings instilled in early life
into the young mind bore their fruit.
In spite of the upheaval of the Arab race under the
early caliphs, literature and arts were by no means
7. “I am the city of learning; ‘Ali is its gate.”
3 18 Ameer ‘ Ali
neglected in the metropolis of primitive Islam. ‘Ali
and [‘Abdullah] Ibn ‘Abbas [619-686], his cousin,
gave public lectures on poetry, grammar, history, and
mathematics; others taught the art of recitation or
elocution; whilst some gave lessons in calligraphy—
in ancient times an invaluable branch of knowledge.
On [caliph] ‘Uthman’s tragical death [in 656] the
Scholar [‘Ali] was called by the voice of the people
to the helm of the state. During his retirement ‘Ali
had devoted himself to the study of the Master’s pre¬
cepts by the light of reason. “But for his assassina¬
tion,” to quote the language of a French historian,
“the Muslim world might have witnessed the realiza¬
tion of the Prophet’s teachings, in the actual amal¬
gamation of Reason with Law and in the imperson¬
ation of the first principles of true philosophy in
positive action.” The same passionate devotion to
knowledge and learning which distinguished Mu¬
hammad, breathed in every word of his Disciple.
With a liberality of mind—far beyond that of the age
in which he lived—was joined a sincere devoutness
of spirit and earnestness of faith. His sermons, faith¬
fully preserved by one of his descendants, and his
litanies or psalms, portray a devout uplooking toward
the Source of All Good, and an unbounded faith in
humanity. The accession of the Umayyads [reigned
661-750] to the rulership of Islam was a blow to the
progress of knowledge and liberalism in the Muslim
world. Their stormy reigns left the nation little lei¬
sure to devote to the gentler pursuits of science; and
to this, among the sovereigns, was joined a charac¬
teristic idolatry of the past. Their thoughts were en¬
grossed by war and politics. During the compara¬
tively long rule of a century, the House of Umayya
produced only one man devoted to the cultivation of
letters; and this man was Abu Hashim Khalid ibn
Yazid [al-Umawi, circa 668-704], “the philosopher
of the Marwanian family,” 8 as he has been called,
who was set aside from the succession on account of
his learning.
The jealous suspicion and the untiring animosity
of the children of Abu Sufyan and Hind [early op¬
ponents of Islam, parents of the first Umayyad ca¬
liph] had obliged the descendants of the Prophet to
8. Makhaz-i 'ilium [ Source of the Religious Sciences] of
Maulavi Sayyid Karamat ‘Ali [Jawnpuri, 1796-1876]. This
learned scholar was nearly 40 years curator of the Imambara
at Houghly.
live a life of humble retirement. “In the night of mis¬
ery and unhappiness,” they followed truly and faith¬
fully the precepts of their ancestor, and found con¬
solation in intellectual pursuits. Their ardent love of
knowledge, their passionate devotion to the cause of
humanity—their spirit looking upwards far above the
literalness of common interpretations of the law—
show the spirituality and expansiveness of Islam. 9
The definition by the Imam Ja‘far al-Sadiq of sci¬
ences or knowledge gives some idea of their faith in
the progress of man: “The enlightenment of the heart
is its essence; Truth its principal object; Inspiration,
its guide; Reason, its accepter; God, its inspirer; and
the words of man its utterer.” 10
Surrounded by men whom love, devotion, and
sympathy with their patience had gathered around
them, the early descendants of the Prophet were natu¬
rally more or less influenced by the varied ideas of
their followers. Yet their philosophy never sinks to
that war of words without life and without earnest¬
ness which characterized the schools of Athens or
Alexandria under the Ptolemies [Egyptian dynasty,
4th-1 st centuries b.c.].
But though literature and philosophy were at a
discount among the rulers, the example of the Imams
[divinely inspired descendants of the Prophet] natu¬
rally exercised no small influence on the intellectual
activity of the Arabs and the subject races. Whilst the
Umayyads discouraged the peaceful pursuits of the
mind, the children of Fatima [daughter of the
Prophet, circa 605-633], with remarkable liberalism,
favored learning. They were not devoted to the past—
the salaf [first generation of Muslims] was not their
9. See the hadith al-ihlilaj, from the Imam ‘Ali ibn Musa
al-Riza [died 818], reported by Mufazzal ibn ‘Umar Ju‘fi
[died 763], Bihar al-anwar. [The hadith al-ihlilaj is a Shi‘i
treatise on the existence and unity of God, attributed by the
150-volume Bihar al-anwar to Ja‘far al-Sadiq. Ihlilaj is a
small fruit with medicinal properties, myrobalan, that is re¬
peatedly mentioned in illustrations in the treatise.—Ed.]
10. Ta’rikh al-hukama’ [History of the Wise Ones], by
Jamal al-Din [‘Ali ibn Yusuf] al-Qifti [1172-1248], founded
upon another work bearing the same name, by Shihab al-Din
Suhrawardi [1154-1191]; Shihab al-Din was a Platonist—an
Ishraqi [Uluminationist]—an idealist, and was condemned
and put to death by the orthodox synod in the reign of
Saladin’s [1138-1193] son. Compare the first khutba [ser¬
mon] of the Nahj al-Balagha [The Way of Eloquence, attrib¬
uted to ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib], and the traditions [of the Prophet]
on knowledge in the Bihar al-anwar.
THE SPIRIT OF ISLAM 319
guide. With the Master’s precepts to light their path,
they kept in view the development of humanity, and
devoted themselves to the cultivation of science and
learning in all its branches. Like the Master and the
early caliphs, the “Philosophers of the House of
Muhammad’’ 11 received with distinction the learned
men whom the fanatical persecution of Justinian’s
[Byzantine emperor, 527-565] successors drove for
refuge into foreign lands. The academies of philoso¬
phy and medicine founded by the Nestorians at
Edessa and Nisibis, had been broken up; its profes¬
sors and students were refugees in Persia and Arabia.
Many betook themselves—as their predecessors had
done before, in the time of the Prophet and the ca¬
liph Abu Bakr [reigned 632-634]—to Medina,
which, after its sack by the Umayyads, had again
gathered round Ja'far al-Sadiq a galaxy of talented
scholars. The concourse of many and varied minds
in the City of the Prophet gave an impetus to the
cultivation of science and literature among the Mus¬
lims. From Medina a stream of unusual intellectual
activity flowed toward Damascus. Situated on the
northern confines of the Arabian desert, along the
trade route from Mecca and Medina to Syria, Da¬
mascus had been associated from ancient times with
the Umayyads; and the Syrian Arabs were closely
allied by interest and kinship to the family whom they
had assisted to elevate to the rulership of Islam. The
Umayyads had naturally fixed upon this city as the
seat of their empire; and though shunned with hor¬
ror by the devout Muslims, it formed the gathering
place for the representatives of the many races who
had come under the sway of Islam. The controver¬
sies of Greek and Saracen furnished a strong incen¬
tive to the study of dialectics and Greek philosophy;
and the invention of the diacritical and vowel points
furthered the cultivation of grammar and philology.
At this time flourished two Christian writers of note,
who, fleeing before their orthodox persecutors, had
taken shelter in Damascus. These were Johannes Da¬
mascene [circa 675-749] and Theodorus Abucara
[died circa 770], Their polemical writings against the
Muslims, their rationalistic and philosophical dis¬
putes with their own orthodox brethren, joined to
the influence of the Medinite school, which flour¬
ished under Muhammad al-Baqir [died circa 732] and
Ja’far al-Sadiq, soon led to the growth of philosophi-
11. Makhaz-i ‘ulum.
cal tendencies among the Saracens. For centuries
Greek philosophy had been known to the Persians
and the Arabs; the Nestorians had spread themselves
in the dominions of the Khosrows [pre-Islamic kings
of Iran] since the beginning of Justinian’s reign, but
it was not until all the varied elements had been fused
into an organic whole by Islam that Greek science and
culture exercised any real effect on the intellectual
development of Western Asia. It was toward the close
of the Umayyad rule that several Muslim thinkers
came into prominence, whose lectures on subjects then
uppermost in the minds of the people attracted great
attention. And their ideas and conceptions materially
molded the thoughts of succeeding generations.
It was in the second century [8th century a.d.],
however, that the literary and scientific activity of the
Muslims commenced in earnest, and the chief im¬
pulse to this was given by the settlement of the Arabs
in towns. Hitherto they had lived in camps isolated
from the races they had subjugated. ‘Uthman had laid
a prohibition on their acquiring lands in the con¬
quered countries, or contracting marriages with the
subject nations. The object of this policy was appar¬
ent; it has its parallel in the history of all nations,
ancient and modem. In British India and in French
Algeria it is still in force, During the whole period
of the Umayyad rale the Arabs had constituted the
dominant element—the aristocratic military caste
amongst their subjects. The majority of them were
occupied in warlike pursuits. The gentler avocations
of learning and science were left to the suspected
Hashimis [descendants of Banu Hashim, the Prophet’s
clan] and the children of the Ansar [early Muslims
of Medina, literally Helpers]—to the descendants of
‘Ali, Abu Bakr, and ‘Umar [ibn al-Khattab, caliph,
634—644], The Arabs had carried with them into dis¬
tant regions the system of clientage which had ex¬
isted in Arabia, as it had existed among the Romans,
from ancient times. Clientage afforded to the subjects
protection and consideration, to the conquerors, the
additional strength gained by numbers. Thus, both
in the East and in the West, the leading families al¬
lied themselves with members of the prominent
desert clans and became the maulas or clients, not
freedmen, as has been incorrectly supposed, of their
conquerors. To these clients, besides the Hashimites
and the children of the Ansar and Muhajirin [early
Muslims who had left Mecca for Medina with the
Prophet], such as had survived the sack of Medina,
320 Ameer ‘Ali
was left scholarship and the cultivation of arts and
sciences during the Umayyad rule. With the rise of
the ‘Abbasids [reigned 750-1258] commenced a new
era. They rose to power with the assistance of the
Persians; and they relied for the maintenance of their
rule more upon the attachment of the general body
of their subjects than the fickle affection of the mili¬
tary colonists of Arabia. Abu’1-‘Abbas Saffah [died
754] held the reins of government for but two years.
His brother and successor, [Abu Ja'far] al-Mansur
[reigned 754-775], though cruel in his treatment of
the Fatimids [Egyptian dynasty 909-1171], was a
statesman of the first rank. He organized the state,
established a standing army and a corps of police,
and gave firmness and consistency to the system of
administration. The Arabs had hitherto devoted
themselves almost exclusively to the profession of
arms; the method of government adopted by al-
Mansur gave a new bent to their genius. They settled
in cities, acquired landed properties, and devoted
themselves to the cultivation of letters with the same
ardor which they had displayed in the pursuit of
war.
The rich and fertile valley of the Euphrates, wa¬
tered by the two great rivers of Western Asia, has,
from the most ancient times, been the seat of empire
and the center of civilization. It was in this region that
Babylon, Ctesiphon, and Seleucia had risen succes¬
sively. Here existed at this epoch Basra and Kufa,
with their unruly and volatile inhabitants. Basra and
Kufa had, from the first conquest of the Muslims,
formed important centers of commercial activity. The
latter city was at one time the seat of government. To
Basra and Kufa had come all the active spirits of the
East, who either could not or would not go to the de¬
praved capital of the Umayyads. For the ‘Abbasids,
Damascus had not only no attraction, but was a place
of peril; and the uncertain and fickle temperament of
the people of Basra and Kufa made those cities un¬
desirable as the seat of government. Al-Mansur cast
about for a site for his capital, and at last fixed upon
the locality where Baghdad now stands—a six days’
journey by river from Basra.
Baghdad is said to have been a summer retreat of
Khosrow Anushirvan, the famous monarch of Per¬
sia [reigned 531-579], and derived from his reputa¬
tion as a just ruler the name it bears—the “Garden
of Justice.” With the disappearance of the Persian
monarchy had disappeared the famous Garden where
the Lord of Asia dispensed justice to his multitudi¬
nous subjects; tradition, however, had preserved the
name. The beautiful site, central and salubrious, at¬
tracted the eyes of Mansur, and the glorious city of
the caliphs arose, like the sea goddess issuing from
the waves, under the magic wand of the foremost
architects of the day.
The Baghdad of Mansur was founded in the year
145 of the hijra [Muhammad’s departure from Mecca
to Medina in 622 a.d.] on the western bank of the
Tigris. Soon, however, another city—a new
Baghdad—sprang up on the eastern bank under the
auspices of the heir apparent, the Prince Imperial of
the caliphate, who afterward assumed the title of al-
Mahdi [reigned 775-785]. This new city vied in the
splendor of its structures with the beauty and mag¬
nificence of the Mansuriyya [the city founded by
Mansur], In the days of its glory, before the destroy¬
ing hordes of Genghis [Khan, died 1227] sweeping
over Western Asia had engulfed in ruin every ves¬
tige of Saracenic civilization, Baghdad presented a
beautiful and imposing appearance—a fit capital for
the pontiffs of Islam. 12
The beauty and splendor of the city, before its
sack by the Mongols, have been immortalized in
glowing lines by Anwari [Cental Asian poet, died
circa 1190], most brilliant of panegyrists: 13
Blessed be the site of Baghdad, seat of learning
and art—
None can point in the world to a city equal to her,
Her suburbs vie in beauty with the blue vault of
heaven.
Her climate in quality equals the life-giving
breezes of heaven.
Her stones in their brightness rival gems and
rubies.
Her soil in beneficence has the fragrance of the
amber,
The morning breeze has imparted to the earth
the freshness of Tuba (the tree of Paradise),
And the winds have concealed in her water the
sweetness of Kauthar (the spring of Eden),
The banks of the Tigris with their beautiful
damsels surpass (the city of) Khullakh, 14
12. For a description of Baghdad under the ‘Abbasids,
see [the author’s] Short History of the Saracens (Macmillan
[1899]), p. 444.
13. This English rendering gives an inadequate idea of
the beauty of the original.
14. A city in Cathay famous for the beauty of its women.
THE SPIRIT OF ISLAM
321
The gardens filled with lovely nymphs equal
Kashmir,
And thousands of gondolas on the water.
Dance and sparkle like sunbeams in the sky.
Its designation of the City of Peace, Dar us-
Salam, was derived from a prophecy made by the
astronomer-royal Nawbakht [died circa 776], that
none of the caliphs would die within the walls of
the city, and the strange fulfillment of this prognos¬
tication in the case of 37 pontiffs. The great num¬
ber of holy men who have found their last resting
place within or about its walls, and whose tombs are
objects of veneration to all Muslims, gave to
Baghdad the title of Bulwark of the Holy. Here are
the mausoleums of the greatest Imams and the most
pious Shaykhs [Sufi leaders]. Here reposes the Imam
Musa al-Kazim [died 818], and here lie buried Abu
Hanifa [circa 699-767], the Shaykhs [Abu’l-Qasim]
Junayd [died 910], [Abu Bakr] Shibli [861-946],
and ‘Abd al-Qadir Jilani [1077-1166], the chiefs of
the Sufis.
In the midst of the monuments of the Imams and
Shaykhs stood those of the caliphs and their con¬
sorts. Of the numerous academies, colleges, and
schools which filled the city, two institutions sur¬
passed all others in importance by their wealth and
the number of their students, These were the
Nizamiyya and Mustansariyya; the first established
in the first half of the fifth century of the hijra [ 11th
century a.d.] by Nizam al-Mulk [1018-1092], the
great vizier of Malik Shah, sultan of the Seljuks
[reigned 1072-1092], and the second, built two
centuries later, by the caliph al-Mustansir b’illah
[reigned 1226-1242],
“It is a remarkable fact,” says the historian of
culture under the caliphs, “that the sovereign who
makes us forget some of the darker sides of his na¬
ture by his moral and mental qualities, also gave the
impetus to the great intellectual movement which
now commenced in the Islamic world.” 15 It was by
Mansur’s command that literary and scientific
works in foreign languages were first translated into
Arabic. Himself no mean scholar and mathemati¬
cian, he had the famous collections of Indian fables
15. [Alfred von] Kremer [German Orientalist, 1828—
1889], Culturgeschichte des Orients unter den Chalifen [ Cul¬
tural History of the Orient under the Caliphs], volume 2,
p. 412.
(the Hitopadesa), the Indian treatise on astronomy
called the Siddhanta, several works of Aristotle
[Greek philosopher, 384-322 b.c.], the Almagest of
Claudius Ptolemy [astronomer, 2nd century], the
books of Euclid [mathematician, 4th-3rd centuries
b.c.], as well as other ancient Greek, Byzantine,
Persian, and Syrian productions, translated into the
language of the Arabs. Mas’udi [died 956] mentions
that no sooner were these translations published
than they were studied with much avidity. Mansur’s
successors were not only warm patrons of the
learned, who flocked to the metropolis from all
quarters, but were themselves assiduous cultivators
of every branch of knowledge. Under them the in¬
tellectual development of the Saracens, in other
words of the conglomerate races of the vast empire
which constituted the caliphate, proceeded with
wonderful rapidity.
Each great nation of the world has had its golden
age. Athens had her Periclean era; Rome, her Au¬
gustan age; so, too, had the Islamic world its epoch
of glory; and we may with justice look upon the pe¬
riod which elapsed from the accession of Mansur to
the death of Mu'tadid b’illah [reigned 892-902], with
only a brief intermission during the reign of Muta-
wakkil [847-861], as an epoch of equal if not supe¬
rior greatness and magnificence. Under the first six
‘Abbasid caliphs, but especially under Ma’mun
[reigned 813-833], the Muslims formed the vanguard
of civilization. The Saracenic race by its elastic ge¬
nius as well as by its central position—with the price¬
less treasures of dying Greece and Rome on one side,
and of Persia on the other, and India and China far
away sleeping the sleep of ages—was pre-eminently
fitted to become the teacher of mankind. Under the
inspiring influences of the great Prophet, who gave
them a code and a nationality, and assisted by their
sovereigns, the Saracens caught up the lessons of
wisdom from the East and the West, combined them
with the teachings of the Master, and “started from
soldiers into scholars.” “The Arabs,” says [Alexander
von] Humboldt [German scientist, 1769-1859],
“were admirably situated to act the part of mediators,
and to influence the nations from the Euphrates to
the Guadalquivir and mid-Africa. Their unexampled
intellectual activity marks a distinct epoch in the his¬
tory of the world.”
Under the Umayyads we see the Muslims pass¬
ing through a period of probation, preparing them¬
selves for the great task they were called upon to
322 Ameer ‘Ali
undertake. Under the ‘Abbasids we find them the
repositories of the knowledge of the world. Every
part of the globe is ransacked by the agents of the
caliphs for the hoarded wealth of antiquity; these are
brought to the capital, and laid before an admiring
and appreciating public. Schools and academies
spring up in every direction; public libraries are es¬
tablished in every city free to every comer; the great
philosophers of the ancient world are studied side by
side with the Qur’an. Galen, Dioscorides, Themistius,
Aristotle, Plato, Euclid, Ptolemy, and Apollonius
[ancient Roman and Greek scientists and philoso¬
phers] receive their due meed of appreciation. The
sovereigns themselves assist at literary meetings and
philosophical disquisitions. For the first time in the
history of humanity a religious and autocratic gov¬
ernment is observed to ally itself with philosophy,
preparing and participating in its triumphs.
Every city in the empire sought to outrival the
other in the cultivation of the arts and sciences. And
governors and provincial chiefs tried to emulate the
sovereign. Traveling in search of knowledge was,
according to the precept of the Master, a pious duty.
From every part of the globe students and scholars
flocked to Cordova, to Baghdad, and to Cairo to lis¬
ten to the words of the Saracenic sages. Even Chris¬
tians from remote comers of Europe attended Mus¬
lim colleges. Men who became in afterlife the heads
of the Christian Church, 16 acquired their scholarship
from Islamic teachers. The rise of Cairo under al-
Mu‘ izz li-Din Allah [reigned 953-975] added a
spirit of rivalry to the patronage of learning on the
part of the caliphs of the houses of ‘Abbas [the
‘Abbasids, based in Damascus] and Fatima [the
Fatimids, based in Cairo]. Al-Mu‘izz was the Ma’mun
of the West—the [Gaius] Maecenas [Roman patron
of literature, circa 70-8 b.c.] of Muslim Africa,
which then embraced the whole of the continent
from the eastern confines of Egypt to the shores of
the Atlantic and the borders of the Sahara. During
the reign of al-Mu‘izz and his first three successors,
the arts and sciences flourished under the especial
and loving protection of the sovereigns. The free
university of Cairo, the Dar al-Hikmat —Scientific
Institute—established by al-Mu‘izz, “anticipated
[17th-century English scientist Francis] Bacon’s
16. Such as Gerbert [circa 945-1003], afterward Pope
Sylvester II, who studied in Cordova.
ideal with a fact.” The Idrisids [reigned 789-921]
at Fez, and the Moorish sovereigns in Spain
[reigned 756-1492], outvied each other in the cul¬
tivation of arts and letters. From the shores of the
Atlantic eastward to the Indian Ocean, far away
even to the Pacific, resounded the voice of philoso¬
phy and learning, under Muslim guidance and
Muslim inspiration. And when the House of ‘Abbas
lost its grasp on the empire of the East, the chiefs
who held the reins of government in the tracts which
at one time were under the undivided temporal sway
of the caliphs, extended the same protection to sci¬
ence and literature as the pontiffs from whom they
still derived their title to sovereignty. This glorious
period lasted, in spite of the triumph of patristicism
and its unconcealed jealousy toward scientific and
philosophical pursuits, until the fall of Baghdad
before the Tatar hordes [in 1258], But the wild sav¬
ages who overturned the caliphate and destroyed
civilization, as soon as they adopted Islam, became
ardent protectors of learning!
What was the condition of learning and science
in Christendom at this epoch? Under Constantine
[Roman emperor, reigned 306-337] and his ortho¬
dox successors, the Aesclepions [hospitals] were
closed forever; the public libraries established by the
liberality of the pagan emperors were dispersed or
destroyed; learning was “branded as magic or pun¬
ished as treason”; and philosophy and science were
exterminated. The ecclesiastical hatred against hu¬
man learning had found expression in the patristic
maxim, “Ignorance is the mother of devotion”; and
Pope Gregory the Great [reigned 590-604], the
founder of ecclesiastical supremacy, gave effect to
this obscurantist dogma by expelling from Rome
all scientific studies, and burning the Palatine Li¬
brary founded by Augustus Caesar [reigned 32 b.c-
14 a.d.]. He forbade the study of the ancient writers
of Greece and Rome. He introduced and sanctified
the mythologic Christianity which continued for cen¬
turies the predominating creed of Europe, with its
worship of relics and the remains of saints. Science
and literature were placed under the ban by ortho¬
dox Christianity, and they succeeded in emancipat¬
ing themselves only when Free Thought had broken
down the barriers raised by orthodoxy against the
progress of the human mind.
‘Abdullah al-Ma’mun has been deservedly styled
the Augustus of the Arabs. “He was not ignorant that
THE SPIRIT OF ISLAM 323
they are the elect of God, his best and most useful
servants, whose lives are devoted to the improvement
of their rational faculties... that the teachers of wis¬
dom are the true luminaries and legislators of the
world.” 17
Ma’mun was followed by a brilliant succession
of princes who continued his work. Under him and
his successors, the principal distinguishing feature
of the school of Baghdad was a true and strongly
marked scientific spirit, which dominated over all
its achievements. The deductive method, hitherto
proudly regarded as the invention and sole mo¬
nopoly of modern Europe, was perfectly understood
by the Muslims. “Marching from the known to the
unknown, the school of Baghdad rendered to itself
an exact, account of the phenomena for the purpose
of rising from the effect to the cause, accepting only
what had been demonstrated by experience; such
were the principles taught by the (Muslim) masters.”
“The Arabs of the ninth century,” continues the au¬
thor we are quoting, “were in the possession of that
fecund method which was to become long after¬
wards, in the hands of the moderns, the instrument
of their most beautiful discoveries.” [...]
Islam inaugurated the reign of intellectual liberty.
It has been truly remarked, that so long as Islam re¬
tained its pristine character, it proved itself the warm
protector and promoter of knowledge and civiliza¬
tion—the zealous ally of intellectual freedom. The
moment extraneous elements attached themselves
to it, it lagged behind in the race of progress. But,
to explain the stagnation of the Muslims in the
present day, it is necessary to glance back for a
moment at the events that transpired in Spain, in Af¬
rica, and in Asia between the twelfth and the sev¬
enteenth centuries. In the former country, Christian¬
ity destroyed the intellectual life of the people. The
Muslims had turned Spain into a garden: the Chris¬
tians converted it into a desert. The Muslims had
covered the land with colleges and schools; the
Christians transformed them into churches for the
worship of saints and images. The literary and sci¬
entific treasures amassed by the Muslim sovereigns
were consigned to the flames. The Muslim men,
women, and children were ruthlessly butchered or
burnt at the stake; the few who were spared were
17. AbuT-Faraj [Ibn al-Jawzi, 1126-1200],
reduced to slavery. Those who fled were thrown
on the shores of Africa helpless beggars. It would
take the combined charity of Jesus and Muham¬
mad to make Islam forget or forgive the terrible
wrongs inflicted by the Christians of Spain upon
the Andalusian Muslims. But the punishment was
not long in coming. Before the world was a cen¬
tury old, Spain’s fire had sunk into a heap of
ashes!
In Western Africa, the triumph of Patristicism
under the third Almohad sovereign 18 and the uprise
of Berber fanaticism turned back the tide of
progress, arrested the civilization of centuries, and
converted the seats of learning and arts into centers
of bigotry and ignorance. The settlement of the
Corsairs on the Barbary coast and the anarchy which
prevailed in Egypt under the later Mamluks [reigned
1254-1517], discouraged the cultivation of peace¬
ful knowledge. In Asia the decadence of the Timurid
dynasty [reigned 1370-1500], the eruption of the
wild and fanatical Uzbeks, and the establishment of
their power in [Samarqand,] the capital of [Amir]
Timur [reigned 1370-1405], destroyed the intellec¬
tual vitality of the people. In Persia, under the
Safavis [reigned 1501-1732], literature and science
had begun to breathe once more; but this renais¬
sance was only temporary, and with the irruption
of the barbarous Ghilzais the renovated life of Iran
came to an end. A deathlike gloom settled upon
Central Asia, which still hangs heavy over these
unhappy countries, and is slowly lifting in Afghani¬
stan. Under Selim I [reigned 1512-1520], Sulayman
[reigned 1520-1566] and the Murads [14th and 15th
centuries], learning received support in the Ottoman
18. On the decadence of the Fatimid power in Western
Africa there arose a dynasty descended from a marabout or
saint of the country, hence called Almoravid or al-
Murabatiyya. To this family belonged Yusuf ibn Tashfin
[reigned 1061-1106], the patron of [Abu Marwan] Ibn Zuhr
[Andalusian physician, circa 1090-1162]. His son and succes¬
sor was defeated and killed by ‘ Abd al-Mu’min [reigned 1130—
1163], the founder of the dynasty of Almohads (al-Muwahidin,
the Unitarians), who sacked and destroyed Morocco and Fez.
They were akin to the Wahhabis and the Ikhwan [revivalist
movements of the early 19th and 20th centuries] of Central
Arabia, and probably not very different from the Mahdists
[revivalist and anti-colonial movement, late 19th century] of
Nubia [Sudan]. The first two sovereigns of this dynasty, ‘Abd
al-Mu’min and Yusuf, encouraged learning and arts; in the
reign of Ya'qub al-Mansur [reigned 1184-1199], the third
Almohad king, fanaticism became rampant.
324 Ameer ‘All
dominions; but the Osmanlis were on the whole a
military race. At first from ambition, afterward from
sheer necessity and for self-preservation, they had
been at war with a relentless foe, whose designs
knew no slackening, whose purpose was inscru¬
table. That enemy has disappeared, but the nation
has still to fight for its existence. Letters and arts,
under such conditions, can make but little progress.
Dealing with the charge of obscurantism, often lev¬
eled against Islam, M[onsieur Joseph-Arthur]
Gobineau [French ethnologist, 1816-1882] makes
the following pregnant observation;
Imagine in any European country the absolute
predominance of military and administrative
despotism during a period of 250 years, as is the case
in Turkey; conceive something approaching the
warlike anarchy of Egypt under the domination of
foreign slaves—Circassians, Georgians, Turks, and
Albanians; picture to yourself an Afghan invasion,
as in Persia after 1730, the tyranny of Nadir Shah
[reigned 1736-1747], the cruelties and ravages that
have marked the accession of the dynasty of the
Qajars [reigned 1794-1924]—unite all these
circumstances with their naturally concomitant
causes, you will then understand what would have
become of any European country although
European, and it will not be necessary to look further
for any explanation of the ruin of Oriental countries,
nor to charge Islam with any unjust responsibility.
From the time of its birth in the seventh century
up to the end of the seventeenth, not to descend
later, Islam was animated by a scientific and liter¬
ary spirit equal in force and energy to that which
animates Europe of our own day. It carried the
Muslims forward on a wave of progress, and en¬
abled them to achieve a high degree of material and
mental development. Since the eruption of the
Goths and the Vandals, the progress of Europe has
been on a continuous scale. No such calamity as has
afflicted Asia, in the persons of the Tatars or the
Uzbeks, has befallen Christendom since [Hun ruler]
Attila’s retreat from France [in 451], Her wars, cruel
and bitter, fierce and inhuman, have been waged on
equal terms of humanity or inhumanity. Catholics
and Protestants have burnt each other; but Europe
has never witnessed, since the wholesale butcher¬
ies of the poor Spanish Moors, the terrible massa¬
cres committed by the Tatars in all the centers of
civilization and culture, in which fell the gifted
classes who formed the backbone of the nation. 19
And now,
The spider holds watch in the palace of Caesar,
The owlet beats the drum on the tower of
Afrasiyab. 20
19. The sack of Baghdad by the Mongols exemplifies what
happened in other cities, but in order to give a true conception
of the fearful atrocities perpetrated by the savages, it requires
to be painted by another [Edward] Gibbon [English historian,
1737-1794], For three days the streets ran with blood, and the
water of the Tigris was dyed red for miles along its course. The
horrors of rapine, slaughter, and outraged humanity lasted for
six weeks. The palaces, mosques, and mausoleums were de¬
stroyed by fire or leveled to the earth for their golden domes.
The patients in the hospitals and the students and professors
in the colleges were put to the sword. In the mausoleums the
mortal remains of the shaykhs and pious imams , and in the
academies the immortal works of great and learned men, were
consumed to ashes; books were thrown into the fire, or, where
that was distant and the Tigris near, were buried in the waters
of the latter. The accumulated treasures of five centuries were
thus lost forever to humanity. The flower of the nation was
completely destroyed. It was the custom of Hulagu [reigned
1256-1265], from policy and as a precaution, to carry along
with his horde the princes and chiefs of the countries through
which they swept. One of these princes was [Abu Bakr ibn]
Sa‘d ibn Zangi, the alabek [governor] of Fars [1226-1260],
The poet Sa'di [circa 1213-1292] had, it appears, accompa¬
nied his friend and patron. He was thus an eye-witness to the
terrible state of Baghdad and its doomed inhabitants. In two
pathetic couplets he has given expression to its magnitude and
horrors:
It is meet that heaven should rain tears of blood on earth
At the destruction that has befallen the empire of
Musta'sim, Commander of the Faithful [reigned 1242-
1258],
O Muhammad! If in the Day of Judgment you will raise
your head above the earth.
Raise your head and see the tribulation of the people now.
20. [The author's revised 1922 edition, excerpted here,
omits a final sentence that appeared in earlier editions: “Per¬
haps the Muslims of India may, under the auspices of a great
European power, restore to Western and Central Asia some¬
thing of what their forefathers gave to Europe in the Middle
Ages.”—Ed.]
44
Abu’l-Kalam Azad
The Last Word
Abu'l-Kalam Azad (Bengal-lndia, 1888-1958) was the chief theoretician of the Khilafat
movement for Islamic solidarity and a supporter of Indian independence. He was also an
exegete of the Qur'an and a prominent literary figure—hence his sobriquet, "master of
eloquence." Azad came from a scholarly family of Afghan descent that had migrated to
Mecca, where Azad was born. When he was two, his family returned to India and settled
in Calcutta, where he was educated at home following the traditional curriculum, In his
late teens, Azad taught himself English and read the Bible and various books and news¬
papers, leading to a period of doubt and experimentation. He was dismayed by the dis¬
agreements among Muslims, and in the spirit of rejecting orthodoxy he adopted the pen
name "Azad” (free). Later he returned to faith, but in the modernist spirit, influenced by
the writings of Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (chapter I I) and Egyptian reformers. Be¬
tween 1912 and 1930, Azad edited the journals al-Hilal (The Crescent) and al-Balagh (The
Message), the most important Muslim periodicals of the region. He joined the Indian
independence movement, served as president of the All-India National Congress in 1940-
1947, and remained an advocate for Hindu-Muslim amity for the rest of his life, When
Pakistan was created, Azad remained in India, was appointed minister of education, and
served as deputy leader of Congress. The present selection, a speech delivered on the
occasion of one of Azad's many imprisonments by British colonial authorities, argues that
Muslims must struggle for democratic self-rule. 1
I had no intention to submit any oral or written state¬
ment. This [court] is a place where there is neither
any hope for us, nor any demand nor even any com¬
plaint. This is only a turnpike without passing which
we cannot reach our destination. For a short while
therefore, even against our own will, we have to
break our journey here. Otherwise we would have
gone straight to jail.
This is the only reason why for the last two years
I have always opposed the idea of noncooperators’
taking any part in the proceedings of the court, al¬
though the All-India Congress Committee, 2 the Cen-
Abu’l-Kalam Azad, “Statement of Maulana Azad before the
Presidency Magistrate,” translated from Urdu by Durlab
Singh, in Famous Trials of Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal
Nehru, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad (Lahore, Pakistan: Hero
Publications, 1944), pp. 41-67. Statement delivered in
Calcutta, India, January 11, 1922, and published the same
year under the title Qaul-i Faisal (The Last Word). Introduc¬
tion by Marcia K. Hermansen.
1. Ian Henderson Douglas, Abul Kalam Azad: An Intel¬
lectual and Religious Biography (Delhi, India: Oxford Uni¬
versity Press, 1988); Mushirul Hasan, Islam and Indian Na¬
tionalism: Reflections on Abu'l Kalam Azad (New Delhi,
tral Khilafat Committee, 3 and the Jamiat-ul-Ulema
Hind 4 have given this permission that a written state¬
ment might be submitted for the information of the
public, but personally I have always advised and
preferred silence. I feel that a person who tenders the
statement because he is not guilty, even though he
does it with a view to give information to the public,
is nevertheless not altogether free from suspicion.
May be that a modest desire for acquittal and some
unconscious weakness is working within him, while
the path of noncooperation is clear and straight.
India: Manohar, 1992); ‘Imadulhasan Azad Faruqi, The
Tarjuman al-Qur'an: A Critical Analysis of Maulana Abu’l
Kalam Azad's Approach to the Understanding of the Qur'an
(New Delhi, India: Vikas, 1991).
2. [Azad had recently rejoined the Congress movement,
founded in 1885, which was the primary pro-independence
organization in British India.—Ed.]
3. [Azad was a leader of the Khilafat movement, founded
in 1919, which was a South Asian effort to support the Otto¬
man caliphate and Muslim control over the holy sites of
Arabia.—Ed.]
4. [The Jamiat-ul-Ulema Hind (Association of [Muslim]
Religious Scholars of India) was founded in 1919—Ed.]
325
326 Abu'l-Kalam Azad
Noncooperation is the result of utter disappoint¬
ment with the existing conditions. And this despon¬
dency has led to determination for complete change.
Noncooperation on the part of any man reveals his
dissatisfaction with the justice of the government and
shows his nonacceptance of force based on injustice,
with the effect that he sees no other alternative ex¬
cept a change.
So if he is dejected to such a degree he sees no
alternative except a change, how can he expect from
that power that it will do justice to him.
Even if this reality is lost sight of, to expect ac¬
quittal in the present circumstances is not more than
a vain desire. It will be as if a denial to one’s own
knowledge. With the exception of the government
itself, no sensible man can expect justice from the law
courts in the present state. Not because they are com¬
posed of such persons who do not like to do any jus¬
tice, but because these are based on such a system of
government where no magistrate can do justice to
those criminals, with whom the government itself
does not like to have fair play.
1 want to make it clear here that noncooperation
is directed only against the government, the system
of the government, and principles of the present gov¬
ernment, and never against individuals
History bears witness that, whenever the ruling
powers took up arms against freedom and justice, the
courtrooms were used as most simple and harmless
weapons. The jurisdiction of courts is a force that can
be utilized both for justice and injustice. In the hands
of a just government, it becomes the best means of
righteousness, but for the repressive and tyrannical
government, no other weapon is more useful for ven¬
geance and injustice than this.
Next to battlefields, courts have played the most
prominent part in setting the example of injustice in
the history of the world. From the holy founders of
religions to the inventors and pioneers of science,
there was no holy or righteous organization which
was not produced before the courts like criminals.
The iniquities of courts of law constitute an end¬
less list, and history has not yet finished singing the
elegy of such miscarriages of injustice. In that list we
observed a holy personage like Jesus, who had to
stand in his time before a foreign court and was con¬
victed even as the worst of criminals. We see also in
the same list Socrates [Greek philosopher, 469-399
b.c.], who was sentenced to be poisoned for no other
crime than that of being the most truthful person of
his age. We meet also the name of that great
Florentine martyr to truth, the inventor Galileo [Ital¬
ian astronomer, 1564—1642], who refused to belie his
observations and researches merely because their
avowal was a crime in the eyes of constituted author¬
ity. I have called Jesus a man, because to my belief
he was a holy person who had brought the heavenly
message of love and righteousness; but he was greater
even than this in the eyes of millions of people. Con¬
sequently what a wonderful place this convict’s dock
is, where the most righteous as well as the most crimi¬
nal people are made to stand.
When I ponder on the great and significant his¬
tory of the convict’s dock, and find that the honor of
standing in that place belongs to me today, my soul
becomes steeped in thankfulness and praise of God.
And He alone sees the real joy and happiness of my
mind. In this dock of the convicts I feel myself an
object of envy for emperors. [.. .]
At any rate it was never my intention to present a
statement; but on the 6th of January [1922], when I
was produced before the court, I found that the Gov¬
ernment was quite bewildered in the matter of secur¬
ing punishment for me, although 1 am a man who, in
accordance with his desires, must be given the maxi¬
mum punishment.
First I was prosecuted under section 17/2 [of the]
Criminal Amendment Act; but when such proof
could not be produced as is considered absolutely
necessary for proving the crime these days, the case
under this section was withdrawn, although reluc¬
tantly. Then a case under section 124-A had been set
up against me, but unfortunately that too was not
enough for the purpose. [. ..]
Seeing this, my mind changed. I felt that the rea¬
son which was responsible for my withholding the
statement, demanded that I should not remain silent,
and the crime that the government have not been able
to prove I should rather admit myself with my own
pen. [. . .]
The bureaucracy in India is nothing more nor less
than the domination which powerful individuals will
always normally attain over a nation decaying by its
own neglect and internal weakness. In the natural
course of things, such dominant authority cannot
possibly countenance any nationalistic awakening or
agitation for progress, reform, or justice. And as such
agitation would spell the inevitable downfall of its
dominant power, it seeks to kill all agitation by de¬
claring it a crime against constituted authority. No
THE LAST WORD 327
power would tamely submit to movements likely to
bring its own decline, however much such decline
might be in the ultimate interest of justice. This pos¬
ture of affairs is merely a struggle for existence in
which both sides fight desperately for their principles.
An awakened nation aspires to attain what it consid¬
ers its birthright, and the dominant authority would
fain not budge an inch from its position of unques¬
tioned way. The contention might be advanced that
the latter party even likes its opponents [and] is not
open to any blame, inasmuch as it is merely putting
up a fight for its own survival, and it is quite an inci¬
dental matter that its existence happens to be inimi¬
cal to perpetuation of justice. We cannot deny facts
of human nature and its inseparable characteristics.
Like good, evil also desires to live in this world and
struggles for its own existence.
In India also such a struggle for the survival of
the fittest has already commenced. Most certainly,
therefore, nothing can be a higher crime against the
domination of government, as at present established,
than the agitation which seeks to terminate its unlim¬
ited authority in the name of liberty and justice. I fully
admit that I am not only guilty of such agitation, but
that I belong to that band of pioneers who originally
sowed the seed of such agitation in the heart of their
nation and dedicated their whole lives to the cher¬
ishing and breeding of this holy discontent. I am the
first Muslim in India who invited his nation for the
first time in 1912 to commit this crime, and within
three years succeeded in bringing about a revolution
in their slavish mentality. Hence, if the government
regards me a criminal and consequently desires to
award punishment, I earnestly acknowledge that it
would not be an unexpected thing, and that I will have
absolutely no grudge against that.
The Real Reason for My Arrest
After the 17th of November [1921], of all the things
in the world which could be desired and wished [by
the government] was that on 24th December [1921],
when the Prince [of Wales, later Edward VIII, 1894-
1972] comes to Calcutta, there should be no hartal
[general strike], and the folly that had been commit¬
ted by introducing the Criminal Amendment Act [of]
1918 could be accepted for one day at least. The
government was of the opinion that my presence and
that of Mr. Cfhitta] R[anjan] Das [Bengali indepen¬
dence leader, 1870-1925] stood in its way. Both of
us therefore were arrested after some bewilderment
and consultations. [. ..]
For the last two years I could not remain continu¬
ously in Calcutta. All of my time was spent either in
the central activities of the Khilafat Committee or
political tours of country. [...] But suddenly the news
about the fresh repression of the Bengal Government
and of the communique of the 18th [November 1921]
reached me in Bombay, and it became impossible for
me to remain outside Calcutta any more under these
circumstances. I consulted [Mohandas] Gandhi [Indian
independence movement leader, 1869-1948] as well.
He was also of this opinion that I should cancel all
programs and go to Calcutta. We were apprehensive
lest the repression of the government should make the
people uncontrolled and undisciplined.
I reached Calcutta on the 1st of December. I
saw repression as well as toleration, both in their
extremes.
I saw that the government, unnerved by the
memorable hartal of the 17th [November 1921], had
become like a man who loses all sense of proportion
in anger and rage. All the national organizations of
volunteers were declared unlawful under the Crimi¬
nal Law Amendment Act of 1908. All the public
gatherings were banned with one stroke of the pen.
The discretion of the police was synonymous with
law, and under the pretext of unlawful organizations
it could do anything.
On the contrary, the people [acted] as if [they had]
taken oaths for patience and perseverance, and de¬
termined neither to be violent under any provoca¬
tions, nor to deter from their path.
Under these circumstances, the path of duty was
clear before me. I saw two bitter realities naked be¬
fore me. First, the entire machinery of the govern¬
ment had centered itself in Calcutta. The final deci¬
sion for victory or defeat would, therefore, be in this
very place. Second, we were struggling with full lib¬
erty up to this time; but the present circumstances had
revealed that this too was not possible henceforth.
Freedom of speech and freedom of assembly: these
are the birthrights of a man. The suppression of these,
in the words of famous philosopher [John Stuart] Mill
[English philosopher, 1806-1873], are in no way less
than “the massacre of humanity.’' But this suppres¬
sion is being carried on without any hesitation. So I
canceled all other programmes and decided to remain
in Calcutta so long as one of the two things did not
328 Abu’l-Kalam Azad
make its appearance—either the government with¬
drew its communique or arrested me. [. . .]
The fact is that the past few days provided both
the realities simultaneously for the pages of history.
If on one hand, all the artificial curtains were removed
from the face of the government; on the other side,
the national strength also manifested itself after pass¬
ing through a hard ordeal. The world witnessed that,
if the government is unbridled in violence and repres¬
sion, patience and toleration are also gaining momen¬
tum every day in the country. Just as it has always
been refuted, it can even be denied today; but it will
be the most instructive story for history of tomorrow.
It will guide the future as to how moral and passive
resistance can defeat the repression and pride of
material forces, and as to how it can be possible to
face bloody weapons with sheer nonviolence and
sacrifice. I at least do not know where among the two
parties—in the government or the country—to seek
the education of that great man who had brought the
message of patience and godliness as against evil. I
think the officials of bureaucracy will not be unaware
of his name. His name was Christ.
The philosophy of history tells us that lack of
wisdom and farsightedness always befriended the
declining powers. The government imagined that
they would suppress the Khilafat and Swarajya [self-
rule] movements with violence and repression and
the hartal of 24th [December 1921] would be warded
off... but soon the government realized that repres¬
sion let loose against national awakening is not likely
to prove fatal. I confess that not only on these two
occasions, but in my numerous speeches in the last
two years, I have used such and even more strong and
definite phrases. To say so is my imperative duty in
my creed, and I cannot hesitate from performing my
duty simply because it would be regarded a crime
under section 124-A. I want to repeat this even now,
and will go on repeating it so long as my tongue
works. If I don’t do it, I will be guilty of the worst
crime before the Creator and His creation.
Certainly, I have said, “This government is a ty¬
rant.” But if I don’t say so, what else should I say? I
don’t understand why I am expected not to call spade
a spade. I refuse to call “white” a thing which is ap¬
parently black. The mildest and the softest words that
I could use in this respect were these. I could not think
of any other thing for such a crystal reality.
I have certainly been saying that there are only
two paths before us: the government should restrain
from doing injustice and jeopardizing our rights; and
if it can’t, it must be wiped out of existence. I don’t
comprehend what else could be said. A thing which
is apparently an evil should either mend itself or end
itself. When I am convinced of the evils of the gov¬
ernment, then certainly I cannot pray for its long life.
Why is it that this has become an article of my
faith as well as of millions of my countrymen? [.. .]
Let me make it clear that this is my faith simply be¬
cause I am an Indian; because I am a Muslim; because
I am a man.
It is my belief that liberty is the natural and God-
given gift of man. No man and no bureaucracy con¬
sisting of men has got the right to make the servants
of God its own slaves. However attractive be the
euphemism invented for “subjugation” and “slav¬
ery,” still slavery is slavery, and it is opposed to the
will and canons of God. I, therefore, consider it a
bounden duty to liberate my country from its yoke.
The notorious fallacies of “reform” and “gradual
transference of power” can produce no illusions and
pitfalls; this is my unequivocal and definite faith.
Liberty being the primary right of man, it is nobody’s
personal privilege to prescribe limits or apportion
shares in the distribution of it. To say that a nation
should get its liberty in graduated stages is the same
as saying that an owner should by right receive his
property only in bits, and a creditor his dues by in¬
stallments. [. . .] Whatever philanthropic acts might
be performed by a man who has usurped our prop¬
erty, his usurpation would still continue to be utterly
illegal.
Evils cannot be classified into good and bad. All
that is in fairness possible is to differentiate the vary¬
ing degree. For instance, we can say “very heinous
robbery” and “less heinous robbery,” but who can
speak of “good robbery” and “bad robbery”? I can¬
not, therefore, at all. conceive of any justification for
such domination, because by its very nature it is an
act of inequity.
Such is my duty as a man and as an Indian, and
religious injunctions have imposed upon me the same
duty. In fact, the greatest proof of the truth of my
religion is that it is another name for the teaching of
the rights of man. I am a Muslim, and by virtue of
being a Muslim this has become my religious duty.
Islam never accepts as valid a sovereignty which is
personal or is constituted of a bureaucracy of a hand¬
ful of paid executives. Islam constitutes a perfected
system of freedom and democracy. It has been sent
THE LAST WORD 329
down to get back for the human race the liberty which
has been snatched away from it. Monarchs, foreign
dominations, selfish religious pontiffs, and power¬
ful sections had alike misappropriated this liberty of
man. They had been fondly nursing the belief that
power and possession spell the highest right. The
moment Islam appeared, it proclaimed that the high¬
est right is not might but right itself. No one except
God has got the right to make serfs and slaves of
God’s creatures. All men are equal, and their funda¬
mental rights are on a par. He only is greater than
others whose deeds are the most righteous of all. [...]
The sovereignty of the Prophet of Islam and of the
caliphs was a perfected conception of democratic
equality, and it could only take shape with the whole
nation’s will, unity, suffrage, and election. This is the
reason why the sovereign or a president of a repub¬
lic is like a designated caliph; caliphate literally
means nothing more nor less than a representation,
so that all the authority a caliph possesses consists
in his representative character, and he possesses no
domination beyond this representative authority.
If Islam defines it as a duty of Muhammadans to
refuse to acknowledge the moral justification even
of an Islamic government, if full play is not granted
in it to the will and franchise of the nation, it is per¬
fectly superfluous to add what under Islam would be
the ruling given about a foreign bureaucracy. If today
there was to be established in India an Islamic gov¬
ernment, but if the system of that government was
based upon personal monarchy or upon bureaucratic
oligarchy, then to protest against the existence of
such a government would still be my primary duty
as a Muslim. I would still call the government op¬
pressive and demand its replacement.
I frankly confess that this original conception of
Islamic sovereignty could not be uniformly main¬
tained in its primal purity on account of the selfish¬
ness and personal domineering of the later Muham¬
madan sovereigns. The mighty magnificence of the
emperors of ancient Rome and of the shahs of Persia
had attracted the Muslim sovereigns powerfully to
the dubious glory of great monarchial empires. They
began to prefer the majestic figures of [Julius] Cae¬
sar [Roman emperor, died 44 b.c.] or Khosrow [king
of Iran, reigned 531-579] to the simple dignity of the
original caliphs, clad often times in old tattered
cloaks. No period of the dynasties and sovereignties
of Islam has however failed to produce some true
Muslim martyrs, who have made public declarations
of the tyrannies and transgressions of such monar¬
chies, and joyfully and triumphantly suffered all
miseries and hardships which inevitably confronted
them in the thorny paths of duty.
To expect from a Muslim that he should not pro¬
nounce what is right is to ask him to retire from
Islamic life. If you have no right to demand from
a person to give up his religion, then certainly
you cannot require a Muslim that he should not
call tyranny a tyranny; because both the things are
synonymous.
This is that vital organ of Islamic life which, if cut
off, terminates the very existence of its best charac¬
teristics. [...] In the Qur’an—the Holy Book of
Islam—the Muslims have been told that they are wit¬
nesses of truth in God’s universe. [Sura 5, Verse 83,
and other verses] In the capacity of a nation, this is
their national character. [.. .]
Among the numerous sayings of the Prophet of
Islam, one is this, “Pronounce what is good, restrain
the evil. If you don’t do it, evil men will dominate
you and God’s curse will overtake you. You will
offer prayers, but they will not be accepted.”
But how would this national duty be performed?
Islam has indicated three different standards under
three different conditions: “If anyone of you sees an
evil, it is necessary that he should correct it with his
own hands. If he has not the power to do it person¬
ally, he should proclaim it, and if he feels that he has
not the power to pronounce it even, he should con¬
sider it evil in his heart at least. But this last degree
is the weakest stage of religion.” In India we have
not the capacity to correct the evils of the govern¬
ment with our own hands, we have, therefore,
adopted the second measure, that is, we pronounce
its evils.
The Holy Prophet of Islam has preached the fol¬
lowing doctrine to the Muslims. That man is blessed
with the best of deaths who proclaims the truth in face
of a tyrannical administration and is slaughtered in
punishment of this deed. The scripture of Islam, the
Holy Qur’an, defines the greatest attribute of the true
Muslim to be that they fear not any being except God,
and whatever they consider to be the truth, they fear
not any authority in the public proclamation of such
truth. [Sura 6, Verses 14-19, and other verses] The
Qur’an further defines the national characteristics of
the Muslims as follows: They are the witnesses to truth
on God’s earth! [Sura 5, Verse 83, and other verses]
As long, therefore, as they continue to be Muslims.
330 Abu'l-Kalam Azad
they cannot desist from giving this public evidence.
In fact, it has designated Muslims as witnesses, that
is, givers of the evidence of truth. When the Prophet
of Islam extracted a promise of righteousness from any
person, one of the clauses of such a bond used to be,
“I will always proclaim the truth in whatever condi¬
tion and wherever I may happen to be.”
To those Muslims who have it in their religious
duties that they should accept death rather than hesi¬
tate from telling what is true, a case under section
124-A can never be a very frightful thing, the maxi¬
mum punishment under which is seven years. [. . .]
In the early Islamic days, Muslims were truthful
to such an extent that an old woman could dare say
to the caliph of the time in the open court, “If you
fail to do justice your hair would be uprooted like
anything.”
But instead of instituting a case against her, he
would thank God that such outspoken tongues were
present in the nation. Exacdy in the jum'a [Friday
communal] prayers gathering, when the sultan would
get up and say, “Hear and obey,” a man would get
up at once and say, “Neither will we hear nor obey.”
Why? “Because the cloak that you have got on your
person is much more than your own share of cloth,
and this is a breach of trust.” On this the caliph would
produce his son for his witness, who would declare
that he had given his own share of cloth to his father,
and this cloak was prepared with that.
This attitude of the nation was toward the caliph
whose bravery and enterprise overthrew the thrones
of Egypt and Iran. Nevertheless there was no 124-A
in Islamic government. When the attitude of ours, the
Muslims, toward our own national governments had
been such, then what hope can the officers of an alien
government expect from us? Is “the government es¬
tablished by law” in India more dear for us than the
one established by shari‘a [Islamic law]?
Is the kingdom of England and status of Lord
[Rufus D. I.] Reading [British viceroy of India,
1921-1926] more respectable for us than the caliph¬
ate of ‘ Abd al-Malik [ibn Marwan, reigned 685-705]
and status of Hajjaj ibn Yusuf [‘Abd al-Malik’s gov¬
ernor in the Hijaz, 697-714]? If we leave aside the
great difference between “alien and non-Muslim”
and “national and Muslim,” even then what we have
been saying for the governments of Hajjaj ibn Yusuf
and Khalid [ibn ‘Abdullah al-]Qasri [another
Umayyad governor, died circa 743], we will repeat
the same about the “Reading” and [Baron Frederic]
“Chelmsford” governments [viceroy of India, 1916—
1921]. We had said to them, “Fear from God because
the earth is loaded with your tyrannies.” We repeat
the same today. As a matter of fact, what we are doing
today in India, on account of our weakness and help¬
lessness, was in reality meant to be done toward the
tyranny and repression of our own national admin¬
istrators, and not towards alien rulers. Had the agents
of British government understood this reality, they
would have realized that the patience and toleration
of Muslims has passed all limits. More than this, they
cannot quit Islam for Britain.
Islam has pointed out two ways to face the tyr¬
anny of rulers, because conditions are different in
both the cases. One tyranny is forcible possession by
alien rulers, and one of course is of Muhammadan
rulers themselves. For the first, Islam orders the use
of sword. For the second, the commandment is that
the sword may not be taken up, but as far as possible
every Muslim should go on proclaiming the truth. In
the first case, there will be executions at the hands
of the enemies, while in the second place there will
be untold suffering and punishments at the hands of
the tyrants. Muslims should make sacrifices of both
the kinds in both the cases, and the result of the both
is success and victory. Consequently the Muslims
have made both kinds of sacrifices in the last thir¬
teen centuries. They have suffered martyrdoms at the
hands of foreigners, and also shown patience and
perseverance against their own. Just as in the first
case their “war efforts” are without parallel, in the
second case their “spirit of martyrdom” is unique.
The Muslims in India today have adopted the
second course, although their fight is with the first
category.
The time had come for them to take up “the war
effort,” but they have adopted the “martyrdom spirit.”
They have decided not to fight with weapons, but
rather to remain nonviolent—that is, they will do the
same as they had to do in the case of Muslim rulers.
Undoubtedly, a particular state of India is responsible
for their attitude. But the government should think
what more the unfortunate Muslims can do. Unex¬
pectedly, they are doing against the foreigners what
they should have done in case of their own national
rulers.
Truly, I have not the slightest grievance that a case
has been set up against me with a view to give me
punishment. But the revolution of circumstances is
very painful for me that a Muslim is expected not to
THE LAST WORD 33 I
call tyranny a tyranny because he will be tried under
section 124-A.
An outstanding object-lesson in speaking the truth
which their national history presents to the Muslims
is to be found in the order of an autocratic monarch
by which each organ of a rebellious victim’s body
was to be cut off. The charge against the victim was
that he had proclaimed the inequity of the tyrant. Firm
as a rock, he stood and took the punishment in all its
heinous stages, but his tongue, right on to the mo¬
ment when it was severed, went on proclaiming that
autocrat was tyrant. This is an incident of the reign
of the emperor ‘Abd al-Malik, whose domain ex¬
tended from Syria to Sind. Can any one then attach
any weight to a sentence under section 124-A as
compared to this terrible penalty?
I confess that it is the moral decadence of Muslims
and their renouncing the real Islamic life that is respon¬
sible for the bringing about of this fallen state. While
I am penning these lines, I know there is still living in
India many a Muslim who through his weakness pays
homage to this very tyranny. But the failure of man to
act up to the spirit of certain tenets cannot belie the
intrinsic truth of those principles. The tenets of Islam
are preserved make it permissible for Muslims to
enjoy life at the expense of freedom. A true Muslim
has either to immolate himself or to live as a free na¬
tion; no third course is open for him in Islam.
I declare that during the last two years not a single
day has passed when I had not proclaimed the tyr¬
anny of the government with regard to “the khilafat
[movement]” and “the Punjab affairs.” 5 1 admit hav¬
ing always said that a government which is bent upon
exterminating the khilafat [caliphate] and is neither
prepared to compensate nor is ashamed of the tyran¬
nies of the Punjab—there can be no loyalty for such
a government in the heart of any Indian.
On December 13, 1917, when I was interned in
Ranchi, I wrote a detailed letter to Lord Chelmsford
that if the British government, against their declared
promises, ever takes possession of Islamic countries
or the Islamic caliphate, the Indian Muslims would
find themselves faced with only two alternatives.
Either they should side with Islam or with the Brit¬
ish government.
5. [The Punjab affairs of 1919 involved British suppres¬
sion of Indian civil disobedience, culminating in the shoot¬
ing of thousands of peaceful protestors in Jallianwala Bagh,
a public square in Amritsar, Punjab.—Ed.]
At last the same happened. The government broke
their promises glaringly. Neither that promise was
kept up which the government announced on Janu¬
ary 2, 1914 [reference unclear], nor could it keep up
the words which [David] Lloyd George [1863-1945],
the prime minister of England, made in the course
of a speech in the House of Commons on January 5,
1918. 6
These things created a strange position for the
Indian Muslims. The minimum that they could do
according to the Islamic law was to withdraw their
support and cooperation. [...] Muslims have come
to believe that to obtain what is right and just, they
must have swaraj.
My own declaration in this respect, however, is
quite unequivocal. The present government is an
unjust bureaucracy. It is absolutely opposed to the
will and wishes of millions of people. It has always
preferred prestige over justice and truth. It regards
the barbaric massacre of Jallianwala [in 1919] as
right; it considers it no injustice that men should be
made to creep like animals; it allows the whipping
of young students til they became unconscious, sim¬
ply because they refused to salute the Union Jack [the
British flag]; it does not resist from trampling over
the Islamic caliphate, even after petitions of 30 corore
[15 million] people; it considers no sin in breaking
all its pledges and promises, and so on. [.. .] If I don’t
call such a government a “tyrant” and [tell it to] “Ei¬
ther mend yourself or end yourself,” should I call it
“just” and [tell it,] “Don’t mend yourself, but live
long,” simply because tyranny is powerful and is
equipped with prison houses?
Continuously in the last 12 years, I have been
training my community and my country to demand
their rights and their liberty. I was only eighteen years
old when I first started speaking and writing on this
theme. I have consecrated my whole being to it and
sacrificed the best of my life, meaning the whole of
my youth, to my infatuation with this ideal. For four
years I have suffered internment, but during my in¬
ternment even, I have never desisted from pursuing
my work and inviting people to this national goal.
This is the mission of my life; and if I live at all, I
elect to live only for this single purpose. Even as the
6. [Possibly a reference to Lloyd George’s speech of
March 14, 1917. urging import protection taxes for India as
a “great act of justice” (The Parliamentary Debates. House
of Commons, fifth series, volume 91, p. 1183).—Ed.]
332 Abu’l-Kalam Azad
Qur'an says, "my prayers and my observances and
my life my death are all for my lord, the God of the
Universe.” [Sura 6, Verse 162]
How could I deny this “crime” [of sedition], when
I am the first pioneer in this latest phase of that Is¬
lamic movement in India which has created a tremen¬
dous revolution in the political world of the Indian
Muslims and has gradually elevated them to that pin¬
nacle of national consciousness on which they are
seen today. In 1912 I started an Urdu journal, the al-
Hilal [The Crescent ], which was the organ of this
movement, and the object of the publication of which
was mainly what I have declared above. It is an ac¬
tual fact that within three years it had created a new
atmosphere in the religious and the political life of
the Muslims of India.
Previously, they were not only cut off from the
political activities of their Hindu brothers, but were
acting as weapons in the hands of the bureaucracy.
The government’s policy of divide and rule created
a sort of apprehension in their mind that Hindus are
larger in numbers; and if the country attains indepen¬
dence there will be Hindu raj [rule] in India. But al-
Hilal persuaded the Muslims to have confidence in
their faith, instead of numerical inferiority, and in¬
vited them to join hands with the Hindus fearlessly.
[... ] Bureaucracy could not tolerate such a move¬
ment for long. First of all, therefore, the security of
al-Hilal was forfeited, and when the paper was re¬
started under the name of al-Bilagh [The Message],
the government of India interned me in 1916.1 must
say that al-Hilal was out and out an invitation for
“liberty or death.” [. . .]
On the 1st of January, 1920,1 was set at liberty
after an internment of four years; and since that time
up to the moment of my arrest, the whole of my time
was spent in publicity and propaganda of these very
ideals. On February 28th and 29th, 1920, a khilafat
conference was held in the Town Hall of Calcutta,
where the Muslims in utter disappointment made
this announcement: “If the British government even
now fails to accede to the demands of the khilafat,
the Muslims in accordance with their religious in¬
junctions will be compelled to cut off all loyal
connection.”
I was the president of that conference.
I had clearly explained in my long presidential
address all the facts which are presented in these two
speeches (on the basis of which I am being tried
here).
In this address I had also made an explanation of
that Islamic injunction under which the Muslims are
required to noncooperate with the government, that
is, withdraw their hand of help and cooperation.
It was here in this conference where that resolu¬
tion was adopted, under which it was declared un-
Islamic for any faithful Muslim to serve in the army.
The Karachi case [conspiracy charges against seven
Khilafat leaders] was launched on the basis of the
same resolution. I have often pointed out in the press
and in my numerous speeches that this resolution was
first of all drafted by me, and it has been thrice
adopted under my presidentship. So I am the proper
person to deserve punishment in connection with this
“crime.” Also I have with certain more additions
published this statement in a book form with its En¬
glish translation, as a written record of my “offenses.”
During the last two years, alone and with Ma¬
hatma Gandhi, 1 have undertaken several tours of the
country. There is hardly any city where I have not
delivered speeches again and again on “The
Khilafat,” “The Punjab,” “The Swaraj,” and “Non-
Cooperation,” and where I have not repeated all these
things which are being shown in these two speeches.
In December 1920, a conference of the All-India
Khilafat Committee was held side by side with the
annual session of the Indian National Congress. In
April 1921, a conference of the Jamiat-ul-Ulema
came off in Bareilly; in October last, Uttar Pradesh
Provincial Khilafat Conference took place in Agra;
in November, the annual session of All-India Jamiat-
ul-Ulema was held in Lahore. I was also the presi¬
dent of all these conferences, and whatever was said
by all the speakers in all these conferences or by me
in the presidential speeches contained all the things
that are being shown in these two speeches. I must
declare that they were more unambiguous and
equivocal than these.
If the implications of my two speeches come
under section 124-A, I must confess that I have com¬
mitted this crime innumerable times. I will have to
say that in the last two years I have done nothing
except infringement of section 124-A.
In this war of liberty and justice I have adopted
the path of nonviolent noncooperation. Opposed to
us stands an authority armed with the complete
equipment for oppression, excess, and bloodshed.
But we place our reliance and trust, next to God. only
upon our own limitless power of sacrifice and un¬
shakable fortitude. Unlike Mahatma Gandhi, my
THE LAST WORD 333
belief is not that armed force should never be opposed
by armed force. It is my belief that such opposing of
violence with violence is fully in harmony with the
natural laws of God in those circumstances under
which Islam permits the use of such violence. But at
the same time, for purposes of liberation of India and
the present agitation, I entirely agree with all the ar¬
guments of Mahatma Gandhi, and I have complete
confidence in his honesty. It is my definite convic¬
tion that India cannot attain success by means of
arms, nor is it advisable for it to adopt that course.
India can only triumph through nonviolent agitation,
and India’s triumph will be a memorable example of
the victory of moral force.
What I have already said in the beginning, I re¬
peat the same in the conclusion. All that the govern¬
ment is doing today with us is nothing extraordinary
for which it should be condemned. Violence and
oppression are always a second nature of foreign
governments at the moment of national awakening,
and we should not expect that human instinct will be
changed for us.
This is a national weakness common to all indi¬
viduals and organizations. How many men are there
in the world who would return the thing that has come
into their possession simply because they have no
right over it? Then why should such a mercy be ex¬
pected for a full-fledged continent? Power does not
acknowledge a certain argument simply because it
is reasonable and logical. It will not yield until a
greater power makes its appearance and compels it
to submit to all unreasonable and illogical demands.
We realize that if our passion for freedom and
determination for demanding what is our right is true
and strong, the very government which holds us as
criminals today will be compelled to greet us tomor¬
row as victorious patriots.
I am charged with “sedition,” but let me under¬
stand the meaning of “sedition.” Is “sedition” that
struggle for freedom which has not as yet been suc¬
cessful? If this is so, I confess frankly, but at the same
time let me remind that this very thing is called pa¬
triotism when it is successful. The armed leaders of
Ireland were regarded rebels up til yesterday [when
Ireland achieved independence in 1921], but what
title would Great Britain suggest for [Eamon] De
Valera [1882-1975] and [Arthur] Griffith [1871-
1922] today?
Consequently, what is happening today, its judg¬
ment would come tomorrow. Iniquity would be ef¬
faced, and justice would live behind. We have our
faith in the decision of the future.
In any case it is natural to expect showers when
there are clouds in the sky. We see that all the signs
for the change of weather are visible. But pity is over
those eyes who refuse to see the signs.
I had said in these very speeches, “The seed of
liberty can never yield fruit unless fertilized by the
water of oppression.”
The government has begun fertilization.
I had also said, “Don’t be sad over the arrest of
Khilafat volunteers. If you really want justice and
freedom, get ready for going to the jails.”
I want to say something about the magistrate also.
Let him award the maximum punishment that he can
without hesitation. I will never have any complaint
or grudge. I know it that unless the entire adminis¬
tration is changed the instruments will go on with
their work.
I finish my statement in the words of Giordano
Bruno [scientist, 1548-1600], the famous martyr of
Italy, who was also made to stand before the court
like me: “Give me the maximum punishment that can
be awarded, without hesitation. 1 assure you that the
pain that your heart will feel while writing the order,
not a hundredth part of it will be felt by me while
bearing the judgment.”
Mr. Magistrate! I will not take any more time of
the court now. It is an interesting and instructive chap¬
ter of history which both of us are engaged in prepar¬
ing. The [defendant’s] dock has fallen to our lot, and
to yours the magisterial chair. I admit that this chair is
as much necessary for this work as this dock. Let us
come and finish our role in this memorable drama. The
historian is eagerly awaiting it, and the future is look¬
ing forward to us. Allow us to occupy this dock re¬
peatedly and continuously, and you may also go on
writing the judgment again and again. For some time
more, this work will continue till the gates of another’s
court are flung open. This will be the court of the Law
of God. Time will act as its judge and pass the judg¬
ment. And this verdict will be final in all respects.
45
Muhammad Akram Khan
Back to the Qur’an
Muhammad Akram Khan (Bengal-Pakistan, 1868-1968) was a controversial reformerand
journalist. Bom near Calcutta, Khan began his higher education at an English-medium
school, then transferred to a traditional seminary. He founded and edited numerous Urdu
and Bengali journals, and was jailed in the 1920s for writing on anticolonial and pan-
Islamic themes in his journal Sebak (The Worshipper). In the 1940s, he was provincial presi¬
dent of the Muslim League, which sought a Muslim homeland in South Asia, and he became
national vice-president in 1947 just as the region was being partitioned, whereupon he
moved from Calcutta, India, to Dhaka, East Pakistan (later Bangladesh). In addition to
journalistic articles, Khan wrote several longerworks, including a biography ofthe Prophet
Muhammad and a commentary on the Qur’an, Khan is generally regarded as a modern¬
ist, though he was also a member of the Ahl-i-Hadith movement, which some scholars
regard as neotraditionalist. He criticized Bengali Muslim scholars as too often guided by
superstition and ignorance. Khan recommended reform of Muslim family law in South
Asia, arguing that current practices ignored the rights afforded to women in Islam, Simi¬
larly, Khan opposed injunctions against music that he considered to be unsupported by
the sacred sources, While he affirmed the importance of hadith (narratives ofthe Prophet)
in juristic matters, he did not advocate the methods of junsprudence of any one school.
As demonstrated in the essay presented here, he was hostile toward scholars whose
allegiance to a particular school, he argued, instigated sectarian conflicts. 1
The hajj [pilgrimage] season has arrived—travelers
are gathering from various parts of the Islamic world,
and Mecca has taken on a unique beauty. In the sa¬
cred precincts, people gather for sunset and evening
prayers, and they number not less than 100,000. I
tried my best to find out what was going on in this
great assemblage of Muslims. I intend to convey [to
you] the results of my [research] efforts.
Nowadays, learned Muslims from various coun¬
tries have begun to give lessons at the sacred pre¬
cincts. Some give lessons on [Muhammad ibn
Isrna'il] al-Bukhari [the foremost compiler of hadith,
810-870]; some on the Muwatta ’ [The Well-Trodden
Path , by Malik ibn Anas, 710-796]; some on juris¬
prudence, and some on rhetoric and grammar. Hun¬
dreds of Muslims gain great satisfaction from then-
lessons. But, sad to say, I believe I did not benefit
nor gain any satisfaction from all the lessons I sat in
on. The main reason I did not benefit from them is
that all the teachers have a sectarian mentality—they
waste all their brilliance pleading their respective
beliefs most of the time.
In order to uproot division, the Ka’ba was made
the qibla [direction of worship] of all the world’s
Muslims. In order to mute contemptible sectarian¬
ism, this great equalizing practice of the hajj [takes
place], yet people sit in the shade of that Ka’ba
making entrenched divisions among pilgrims per¬
manent. The sight of it is disheartening to me. Once
or twice I had discussions with teachers regarding
Maulana Akram Khan, “Bak tu di kuran” (Back to the
Qur’an), in Abu Jafar, editor, Maolana Akarama Kham
(Maulana Akram Khan) (Dhaka, Bangladesh: Isalamika
Phaundesana Bamladesa, 1986), pp. 418^120. First pub¬
lished in 1929. Translation from Bengali and introduction
by Sufia Uddin.
1. Abu Jafar, Maulana Akram Khan, A Versatile Genius
(Dhaka, Bangladeh: Islamic Foundation Bangladesh, 1984);
Abu Jafar. editor. Maolana Akarama Kham (Maulana Akram
Khan ) (Dhaka. Bangladesh: Isalamika Phaundesana Bam¬
ladesa, 1986); Anisuzzaman, Creativity, Reality, and Identity
(Dhaka. Bangladesh: International Centre for Bengal Studies.
1993); E. T. M. Atikura Rahamana. Bamlara Rajanitite
Maolana Mohammada Akarama Kham, 1905-1947 (Bengalis
in Politics: Maulana Muhammad Akram Khan, 1905-1947 )
(Dhaka. Bangladesh: Bamla Ekademi, 1995).
334
BACK TO THE QUR'AN 335
this extremely insufferable situation, until the dis¬
cussions transgressed into arguments.
However that it may be, after intensive investi¬
gation, nowhere in the sacred precincts did I find the
teaching and the study of the Qur’an. As a result, I
am deeply hurt. And so I tried to gain some peace of
mind by expressing my pain (to a distinguished per¬
son [who would understand]). For a long time he
looked at me, and said with a smile, “The abode of
ill practice is right here [in the sacred precincts].”
Imploring him to speak straight to the point,
below I recount a portion of what he said.
God in the Qur’an gives Muslims advice on jus¬
tice (‘adl). The word justice means “Each thing in
its place”—everything should be placed in its ap¬
propriate station. To put anything above or below
its rightful place is contrary to justice. So the op¬
posite of justice is force and oppression, and the per¬
petrators of oppression will be destroyed. God, most
high, conveys this [point] to Muslims over and over
again in the Qur’an. If one discusses the Muslims’
situation, one will learn that their national life is
filled with this oppression. Today, they strongly
express their wish not to put their relentless effort
in the right place. They are always eager to place
the official (wall) and religious leader (imam) in the
Prophet’s place, and the Prophet in God’s place, and
because it is false their religious practice is bound
to fail. This fatal disease has infected the way of
thinking in every stratum of the Muslim nation.
Many among our intelligent leaders are aware of this
disease, but they have done very little research into
the root cause. In my opinion, the root cause is:
Muslims lack justice [when it comes] to the Qur’an.
Muslims do not put the Qur’an in its rightful place
[of importance]. Not only that, they take the Qur’an
from its highest place and instead bring it down,
placing hadith [narratives of the Prophet] first and
jurisprudence second, above the Qur’an. For this
reason we find that for the study of the Qur’an our
students do not put in one hundredth of the toil they
do for knowledge of the essence of Bukhari and
Hidaya [Guidance , by Burhanuddin Marghinani,
died circa 1197], In Muslim society there is no lack
of talented scholars and possessors of intelligence.
However, all of their genius is directed to the writ¬
ing of books with detailed explanations of jurispru¬
dence and hadith, thus wasting all their talent. As
for the necessity of writing exegeses of the Qur’an,
there are very few among them who have done so.
The rare [gems] are Imam Fakhr al-Din Razi [ 1149—
1209] and Imam [Muhammad ibn ‘ Ali] Shaukani
[circa 1760-1839]. Everyone is aware of the rarity
of Imam Razi’s hadith. Owing to the widespread
neglect of exegesis of the Qur’an, up to this day
Shaukani’s exegesis has not yet been printed. As a
result, knowledge of the Qur’an and its stories is
overshadowed by the stories compiled in Jaygun
Hanifa [a Bengali romance of the 18th century]. If
you do not read Hidaya and Bukhari, you cannot
become a maulavi [religious scholar]. But it is heart¬
rending to note that to be a maulavi does not require
study of the Qur’an. In our society in the modern
world, how many maulavis are able to say with sin¬
cerity that their study of the Qur’an is a tenth of their
study of jurisprudence, hadith, and the principles
of jurisprudence? The last chance to remedy the
situation is now. Without any fear or anxiety, so¬
cial reformers have a duty to situate this society in
truth, namely “to put the Qur'an in its established
place—to you, God, we will again [acknowledge
you] in your rightful place [of honor].”
This page intentionally left blank
SECTION 6
Southeast/East Asia
This page intentionally left blank
46
Al-Imam (Singapore)
An Exposition concerning
the Malays
The Singapore-based journal al-lmam (The Leader ), which appeared from July 1906 to
December 1908, was the first publication in Southeast Asia to carry the modernist Islamic
message. Singapore was the logical confluence of such ideas as it served as the principal
transition point for Southeast Asians on their way to and from West Asia. By 1906 a group
of young men from various Southeast Asian communities joined together in Singapore to
study Islam and promote religious reform, underthe leadership of Shaykh Tahir jalal al-Din
"al-Azhari" (Minangkabau, West Sumatra, 1867-1957), who had studied at Mecca and Cairo
and had met Muhammad Abduh (see chapter 3) and Muhammad Rashid Rida (see chap¬
ter 6). Among the activists of this circle was Abbas bin Muhammad Taha (Minangkabau,
West Sumatra, bom 1885), who spent much of his youth in Mecca, later translated educa¬
tional works from Syria and Egypt and assumed primary editonal control of al-lmam around
1907. This magazine mimicked, in form and content, the Egyptian magazine al-Manar (The
Beacon), Al-lmam translated pieces from al-Manar and other Arab periodicals into Malay,
but placed these borrowings in the context of Southeast Asian conditions, in particular the
“decline of the Malays" as a dynamic race and the challenge to Muslims in the struggle for
modem civilization, Many contributions, including the one presented here, were anony¬
mous, and can best be attributed to the collective effort of the editors of al-lmam, 1
Al-lmam has received what follows here below:
Say the truth even if it is bitter ! 2
[Say it] too, even if with abusive or insulting words,
so long as they are true, in order to awaken those with
intellect. This is like a vile manure which gives life
to plants and makes them fertile for the benefit of
their fruits. Such then is more important than falsely
praising or exalting someone.
The Exposition
For argument’s sake let us hold an imaginary debate
beginning with the premise that the word “Malay”
[‘Abbas bin Muhammad Taha], “Uraian Melayu” (An Expo¬
sition concerning the Malays), Al-lmam (The Leader),
Singapore, August 29, 1908, pp. 100-103, and September 27,
1908, pp. 140-146. Translation from Malay by Abu
Bakar Hamzah, Al-lmam: Its Role in Malay Society, 1906-
1908 (Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Media Cendekiawan, 1991),
pp. 181-190. Editing and introduction by Michael F. Laffan.
1. Abu Bakar Hamzah, Al-lmam: Its Role in Malay Soci¬
ety, 1906-1908 ; William R. Roff, The Origins of Malay Na¬
ts the name or title of a particular race of people of
the East found in the long-famous “Malay Penin¬
sula.” The origin of this term “Malay,” which con¬
sists of five letters, is derived from “Mala Layu” [a
wilting blossom], the flower of a plant that blooms
in the hope that it shall become a fruit which bears
seeds that will spread or scatter and thus extend and
reproduce [the flower]. One form of this flower is the
gardenia. (The Malays say that this is most often
planted around their homes.) Its color is white and
its scent is fragrant. Yet if we sniff it, occasionally
there are parasites within its leaves which can cause
a lasting nasal infection. Have we ever taken such a
tionalism (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1967),
pp. 56-90; Asyumardi Azra. “The Transmission of al-Manar
Reformism to the Malay-Indonesian World: The Cases of al-
lmam and al-MunirStudia Islamika , volume 6, number 3,
1999. pp. 75-100; Michael F. Laffan. "The Umma Below the
Winds: Mecca, Cairo. Reformist Islam and a Conceptualization
of Indonesia,” Ph.D. dissertation. University of Sydney, 2000.
pp. 177-192.
2. [This popular Arabic expression paraphrases a hadith ,
or narrative of the Prophet.—Ed.]
339
340 Al-lmam (Singapore)
withering bloom to fruition other than by deliberately
collecting and implanting its seeds? So too is this
Malay race of ours, which, day by day, grows weaker.
And its language in particular has become corrupted.
The original form [of the word Malay] is m-l-a-
y-u. The initial “m” stands for both malas [lazy] [and]
mulia [honorable]. We may find [both] in the Hikayat
‘Abdullah [The Story of ‘Abdullah, the autobiogra¬
phy of colonial translator ‘Abdullah bin ‘Abdul Kadir
Munshi, written in 1849], when Mr. [Thomas Stam¬
ford] Raffles [British colonial official and founder of
modern Singapore, 1781-1826] instructed Sultan
Husayn [nominal ruler of Singapore, 1819-1824] to
engage in trade in order to enlarge his income. How¬
ever, the latter demurred, as his honor as a sultan
would be debased by so doing.
“L” is the second letter, standing for lalai [negli¬
gent], lemah [weak], and lembut [pliant]. Hence the
Malay race is “negligent” in demanding its rights.
And we can see this in the conduct of Sultan Husayn
Shah of Singapore, which is at odds with that of the
late and eminent Abu Bakar, who was sultan of
Johore [reigned 1862-1895], 3 [The Malays] are
“weak” because of their obstinacy and lack of ini¬
tiative or learning or knowledge. The Chief of
Semantan [Abdul Rahman Dato’ Bahaman, bom
1838] was said to be mighty and powerful, and to
have made himself mighty by bathing in a cauldron
of boiling oil. Nonetheless he was vanquished by
British cannon and bayonets [during the rebellion of
1891-1895], Look [too] in the Hikayat Tanah
Melayu [History of the Malay Land, 16th-17th cen¬
tury] at the tale of the Malacca War [of 1511], which
took place in the time of Sultan Mahmud Shah [died
1528, sultan of Malacca and founder of Johore],
There the Europeans used matchlocks with round
bullets which they said pierced and killed. And this
was despite the Malays’ being “magically impervi¬
ous” and armed with ancient magic daggers. [The
Malays] are “negligent” as, when they are reminded
to do good, they pay no heed. Thus are they!
Refer too to the [Handbook of the ] Federated
Malay States and Pahang, in which a Malay scribe,
educated in the ways of the world, says: “Our Malay
race is so pliant that it cannot be defeated by attack¬
ing its roots. Its tongue is so pliant that when [a
3. [Abu Bakar was a favorite with al-lmam due to his
efforts to open up and modernize Johore.—Ed.]
Malay] studies Chinese with its ‘choo-cheng sound’
he can [replicate it]. So too with the ‘soos-sis’ of the
English tongue. Yet this pliability goes right to the
back-bone and the ribs, much like a plant that may
be coiled or twisted but which does not have the ri¬
gidity to be used as the supporting pillar of a house.
Such rigidity is recalled by the Malay expression
‘Should the supports break, the pillar will remain.’”
The third letter, the tall [Arabic] letter “alif,” de¬
notes ikhtiar [initiative], istiadat [traditions], and
ahmak dengan tiada ihsan [stupid without compas¬
sion], Asutan [agitation], that is, with the tiada aturan
[disorder] of Islam, is also one of its members. And
the anggota [limbs] of the Malays are no different
from those of the Chinese or [even] the Japanese, who
defeated the six-foot-tall giants [that is, the Russians,
who were defeated by the Japanese in 1904-1905].
The “initiative” of the Malay is employed solely
for his self and his nature. [This nature is] covetous
and greedy, as well as malicious, perhaps because
[the Malay] is afraid that his neighbor might be equal
to, or perhaps better than, him. 4 Not one book,
whether on magical potions or worldly knowledge,
will he receive unless it is accompanied by yellow
rice, fried chicken, and a betel-plate filled with ru¬
piahs [coins]. If he receives this, then he will use the
book for instruction. However, he will not pursue that
instruction to the end before breaking off because [he
does not want to concede] that its knowledge exceeds
his own, which he does not want to reveal [to his
students]. (This strong pull of the rupiah is illustrated
in ‘Abdullah Munshi’s story of the elephant trapper
of Malacca.) 5 All [Malay] knowledge is wrapped in
secrecy. Go, sir, to any Malay engineer who has taken
instruction in metallurgy but has not yet completed
that study (that is, he has not yet obtained a “degree”
or “title”). Ask him about some facet of his learning,
like, “Tell me how to go about cutting copper.” And
despite him knowing how, he will reply, “Alas, I have
no idea.” Because of this greed, malice, covetous¬
ness, dullness, and stupidity—which are deeply
planted within his heart—the Malay has not yet been
pulled from his roots.
4. [This appears to be a reference to the station and eco¬
nomic prosperity of the Chinese, Indians, and Arabs of South¬
east Asia.—Ed.]
5. [In this incident the elephant trapper refused to reveal
his special knowledge other than by intimations or partial
disclosure.—Ed.]
AN EXPOSITION CONCERNING THE MALAYS 341
The “traditions” [of the Malays]. (These are illus¬
trated by the stamp of 30 years ago which bore the
image of a snarling tiger.) [These “traditions” are]
exemplified by the imperative for commoners to
prostrate themselves, anywhere or at anytime, should
they encounter their king. Look in ‘Abdullah
Munshi’s Kisah Pelayaran Abdullah [The Voyage of
‘Abdullah , 1838], The customs of old could not be
changed. Commoners could not wear yellow for fear
of being struck down by the divine power of the dead
king (see Book Three, “The Way to Knowledge”).
“Stupid without compassion.” That is: to be angry
without method whilst inflamed by the carnal pas¬
sion of Satan. [This is shown] in the Cerita
Keturunan Melayu [Story of the Ancestry of the
Malays], wherein the [legendary] Sultan of Kota
Tinggi cut open the stomach of [a royal woman
called] Bani Laksamana, who, due to her craving of
jackfruit, had transgressed royal prerogative by tast¬
ing but one pip. It was due to her transgression of
“custom” that, at the instigation of a minister, she was
sentenced to death.
“Agitation.” Listen to the story of [15th century
folk hero] Hang Tuah, who was despicably slandered
despite having saved the king from shameful dis¬
grace. Everything that I have related thus far has
come from the [traditional Malay] stories and annals.
And believe me, dear readers, that some might be
thinking in their hearts that all this is in the distant
past and has been long done with. In short, [they may
say that] it is just “nonsense.” Yet why did the En¬
glish compose stories, which they included in school
curricula as lessons for children to become attentive,
thoughtful, and capable? In particular, there are the
stories of the famous Admiral [Horatio] Nelson
[1758-1805], and the military heroes Sir John Moore
[1761-1809] and the Duke of Wellington [Arthur
Wellesley, 1769-1852], Then there are the men who
are together responsible for the organization of the
government, [Robert Cecil] Salisbury, [William]
Gladstone, Mr. [William] Pitt, and so on [British
prime ministers of the 19th centuries]. Is this not use¬
ful for school children to differentiate stupidity and
idiocy from intelligence and wisdom through [the
example of] such men? Hence these “young bam¬
boos” will not grow wildly and selfishly. (Your ex¬
cellency may well say that “Such is the way of things
in great countries.” Fine. But shouldn’t we practice
self-improvement by the use of a great mirror?) It is
the blessing of the Islamic religion that has allowed
the Malays to remain in existence. This lucky fate is
due to the arrival of an Arab in Malacca—for which
the Malays must give thanks—and not the Portu¬
guese priest who has disturbed the religions of China
and Buddhism, as we can now see.
The letter “y” stands for yakin [convinced faith].
Yet this is only enunciated by their lips and is not
inscribed on their hearts. The letter “w,” the last in
the word “Malay,” is found in the expression, wa
bi ’llah al-tawfiq [in God alone does success abide]
for the Malay people, who, by sentiment and thought,
are of the Islamic religion. On the other hand “w”
can stand for the waba' wa bala ’ [disease and afflic¬
tion] that will lay waste to them and herald their
destruction.
The Aims [of This Exposition]
It can be seen that our current Malay writers men¬
tion, in various newspapers and histories, how all
sorts of Malays—whether from the end of Salang to
Tanjung Romania—are, metaphorically speaking,
looking at great mirrors, including the Mikado
Mutsuhilo [Meiji, emperor of Japan, 1867-1912] and
the ascent of the Japanese race. Or they look at the
fall and weakness of China, the fading of Egypt, or
the exceptions made by His Excellency the late Abu
Bakar and his “modem” slate of Johore, and its like.
What then is the reason? (Recall, dear reader, the
third letter “alif ’ and the question of the Englishmen
to his friend, the Malay engineer, and the resulting
[answer].)
His late Excellency had erased all the despicable
qualities of the Malays from his heart by cultivating
the benefits of human civilization. This he realized
by traveling, not just to England but to China, Japan,
the Malay Peninsula, Java, the ports of the continent
of Europe, Germany, Italy, Turkey, Austro-Hungary,
and so forth. Outwardly he was just taking time on
holiday, yet his heart was filled with the intention to
work and strive for just such an elevation of the
Malay people, even as the Japanese nation had done
and the Chinese are now doing, rousing from their
slumber. (All the peoples of the world know of the
Malays, yet few have seen them. Just look at the
English Windsor Magazine, edited by Sir Frank
Swettenham [1850-1946], Therein you will see a
“sketch” or depiction by a European artist of the
murder of Mr. [James] Birch [British colonial offi-
342 Al-Imam (Singapore)
cial, assassinated in 1875], showing the Malay wear¬
ing only a loincloth!)
It seems then that words of great experience, opin¬
ion, comprehension, and vision were formed on the
heart of this blessed ruler [Abu Bakar] through his
comparing and discerning the most attractive and
fitting actions of the nations of the world. This was
best exemplified by looking at the Japanese nation.
Before defeating China [in 1894-1895], and then
Russia, the Japanese were outwardly very polite, soft
of speech and action. Yet in their hearts they said,
“Curse you! Yet what can we do? Soon you will see
the Japanese nation!” Compare the Japan of today
with its freedom, sturdiness, civilized ways, knowl¬
edge, skill, and wisdom. (Refer to al-Shams al-
mushriqa [The Rising Sun , by Egyptian nationalist
Mustafa Kamil Pasha, 1874—1908; published in Ara¬
bic in 1904 and translated into Malay in 1906].)
Who then did all this? The people of the land, or
Mutsuhito their leader? All of us [Malays] are no
different from a class of children in a school. 6 (This
school is a place where knowledge is acquired in
order to produce a practical and humane person.)
Meanwhile, the teacher is a knowledgeable person
who teaches his pupils all sorts of knowledge and
things that may be appropriate for the benefit of the
children (even where [this contravenes] existing
regulations). However, if the teacher’s knowledge is
weak, coupled with his being lazy, [then he will be]
in the habit of nodding off at his desk, despite hav¬
ing just warned his students loudly, saying while
tapping his cane, “All of you! Keep quiet! Copy two
or three pages from this book.” And he will do so
constantly in order to take up time, lazily believing
that [education is like watching] plants grow. And
at the end of the day he will go straight home to await
his monthly salary.
“You don’t understand the attitude of our teacher,”
said one little boy in the fourth grade. “What knowl¬
edge and learning can we gain by just sitting down
copying without studying anything else?” “He’s
right,” said another, followed by two or three others.
They were soon silenced by a bigger lad (who was a
proud lad, jealous of his status as a favorite of the
teacher—or perhaps that teacher was afraid of his brute
strength), who said: “It’s enough to copy. Don’t dizzy
yourselves standing at the blackboard, giving your-
6. [A variant of the Dutch word for “school” is used here,
as distinct from traditional Islamic madrasa schools.—Ed.]
selves a headache trying to figure out mathematical
problems. The sooner we finish this work, the sooner
we can play.”
“But,” said the little one, “I was sent to school by
my parents [to learn] so that all the school fees are
not paid in vain. And I want to gain skills and knowl¬
edge, for the wise man says, ‘Knowledge is the sum
of a man.’”
Another answers, “But I have seen that some great
men with many stars on their chests have never at¬
tended school, even though schools existed then.”
“Be quiet!” says the big boy in a mockingly polite
voice, while furtively dropping his slate (as one
would drop a pebble concealed in the hand), so that
it will crash on the floor, hoping to startle the teacher
awake to beat the little ones. This is because he likes
to watch his teacher enraged. “You like to think too
much. Just get your pocket-money and buy some
cake, then eat and drink as much as you like.”
“But what if our school is inspected and we who
sit in the highest class are found to be stupid? In the
past our school had a good name, thanks to the ef¬
forts of our old teacher.” “Just let it happen,” says
the big boy. “It won’t be our fault. After the inspec¬
tion this year we shall be free, and we won’t be at
school any more.” Dear readers, shouldn’t children
in “standard” one, two, or three think this wrong for
a school of good name in which they are to remain
for several more years?
“What’s this chatter?” yells the teacher who,
woken by the noise made deliberately by the big boy,
grabs his cane and menaces the little boys. “Sir!” says
the big boy, seeking to kill two birds with one stone,
“These boys were all accusing sir of being lazy and
self-serving. They say that sir does not give lessons
in anything else, that sir likes only ordering us to copy
and that he likes to beat us.”
“Sip-sip” goes the cane to the sound of the boys’
cries as it strikes their backs. Look meanwhile at the
face of the big boy watching them and thinking to
himself: “Serves you right! Now as the cane snaps
you understand. Do you still plan to go on with this?”
And to himself he says, “Were he to beat me with a
cane then I'd punch his face. And what would hap¬
pen then if a visitor came by, or [even] an inspector?
Doubtless the school would ‘fall’ and the teacher
would be relieved of his post.”
It is clear now that the protests and cries of those
students are in vain. These school children are [like]
all of us, inferior and average people calling upon our
AN EXPOSITION CONCERNING THE MALAYS 343
people to arise and emulate [civilized] humanity. [We
do] not do this in order to be a burden or a load. Nor
[do we do it] to cause aggravation in the papers that
seek to protect or serve the “idol-kings” or “chess-
kings.” For what is all this noise made by the people
of Trengganu in the papers saying this and that? As
a matter of fact their “government” 7 is a “despotic
monarchy.” It would be different if they had a “par¬
liament” under the direction of the people of that
state. Then such things would be possible. More
importantly, I feel that the Malays should remain
Malays, not the “civilized” Malays who pretend to
follow the new ways while, in fact, their Malayness
is just a category or uniform. God alone knows the
answer [a common Arabic expression]. The “respon¬
sibility” rests upon the teachers and leaders [of the
Malays], And here [just as in Egypt] the cries of
Mustafa Kamil Pasha may be heard. He tried to help
his oppressed people remove the ferocious British
lion from their necks. However, there were those who
thought him a fool pursuing a lost cause. Yet he, in
fact, showed his love for his homeland, the land of
his birth, attacked by people without any right to that
place.
7. [This word and the following words in quotation marks
are transliterations of English terms.—Ed.]
47
Achmad Dachlan
The Unity of Human Life
Achmad Dachlan (Java, 1868-1923) received a traditional education in java, but was
influenced by modernist teachings during his three years of study at Mecca. He spent
much of his life as a teacher of religion in the new educational system promoted by the
Dutch Administration. One of several reformers who held that secular education needed
a leavening of Islamic teaching, he and his followers devised and used new teaching material
in Dutch, Javanese, and Indonesian. Active in many of the leading organizations of the
day—the cultural Budi Utomo (High Endeavor), the educational Jami'at Khair (Benevo¬
lent Association), and the political Sarekat Islam (Islamic Association)—he also founded
his own organization, the Muhammadiyah, which became the largest modernist Muslim
organization in Southeast Asia. The Muhammadiyah was originally concerned with Mus¬
lim education, but later expanded into the entire social welfare sector. Dachlan was an
accomplished teacher and oganizer, but he wrote very few essays. The text selected
here appears to have been part of instructions to Muhammadiyah leaders, exhortingthem
to provide role models, overcome the force of local custom, gain more knowledge of
true Islam, and make it accessible to their followers. The work is not marked by intellec¬
tual citations or even religious allusions, but uses Islamic language, such as happiness in
the "Hereafter” and the reality of God. Despite Dachlan’s opposition to Sufi mysticism,
he consistently draws that tradition into his work, especially with his rejection of human
desires and reference to the importance of human conscience. 1
The binding role for human life consists of a knowl¬
edge that is too large for humans to consider. There¬
fore it is hoped that readers will give this lesson serious
consideration, remember it, and read it slowly.
To manage one’s life a person should use an in¬
strument, that is, the Qur’an. Are there reasons for
all people to have common feelings? [Of course there
are!] First of all, human beings, regardless of
ethnicity, actually come from one [set of] ancestors,
that is, Adam and Eve. So all humans are related to
each other, because they are from one blood. The
second reason is to establish a peaceful and happy
order of human life that is impossible to gain with¬
out having common feelings and unified hearts. This
is undeniably true.
O leaders, please think! Since the era of the
Prophet, his Companions, and early leaders of the
Muslim community, up to the present, there has been
no common feelings and unified hearts among human
beings. Though there were very famous and edu¬
cated individuals [throughout that history] and
many worked for long periods, they failed to achieve
commonality.
Kyai Haji Ahmad Dachlan. “Kesatuan Hidup Manusia” (The
Unity of Human Life), in Pesan-Pesan Dua Pemimpin Besar
Islam Indonesia (The Messages of Two Great Leaders of In¬
donesian Islam), edited by Abdul Munir Malkan (Yogyakarta,
Indonesia: Medio, 1986), pp. 7-15. Text delivered as a speech
to Muhammadiyah leaders in 1923. Translation from
Indonesian by Achmad Jainuri. Introduction by Howard M,
Federspiel.
1. Alfian, Muhammadiyah: The Political Behavior of a
Muslim Modernist Organization Under Dutch Colonialism
(Yogyakarta, Indonesia: Gadjah Mada University Press,
1989); Abdul Mukti ‘Ali, “Modem Islamic Thought in In¬
donesia,” Mizan (The Scales ), volume 2, number 1, 1984,
pp. 11-29; Howard M. Federspiel, “The Muhammadijah: A
Study of an Orthodox Islamic Movement in Indonesia,” In¬
donesia, number 10, October 1970, pp. 57-80: Achmad
Jainuri, Muhammadijah: Gerakan Reformasi Islam di Jawa
pada Awal Abad Kedua Puluh (The Muhammadiyah: An Is¬
lamic Reform Movement in Twentieth Century Java )
(Surabaya, Indonesia: Bina Ilmu. 1981); James L. Peacock,
Purifying the Faith: The Muhammaijah Movement in Indo¬
nesian Islam (Tempe, Ariz.: Arizona State University Pro¬
gram for Southeast Asian Studies, 1992).
344
THE UNITY OF HUMAN LIFE 345
O leaders, do not be surprised! Look to your right
and to your left! Everything is in disorder, is it not?
Remember, I do not simply look at one nation, but at
all human beings. Even if we focus on a single nation,
we see that there is no common intention and will. This
is not safe, but just the opposite, it is dangerous. Why?
First, we leaders are not in agreement [with one an¬
other], We neglect each other; one denies the other’s
knowledge, although we are aware that human beings
need that knowledge. Beyond the leaders’ lack of suf¬
ficient knowledge, there is also narrow-mindedness,
so that all things are decided without certainty, like
groping in the dark. From such a condition, a great
debate arises among the leaders themselves.
The second reason is that the leaders have not yet
led their people by [their own] actual behavior, but
only lead by use of vocal direction. They are still
trying to understand themselves, and to spread their
understanding to the people, but they have not [yet]
related this understanding to their own action and to
the behavior of others. Consequently, most leaders
rely on their voice to spread their opinions, although
their own behavior is very bad and has a negative
impact. Clearly, they are captive to their own desires,
without any understanding and self-awareness. For
example, personal appetite drives them to be lazy and
stingy, and these characteristics mark their leadership
styles. That is the way personal appetite works nega¬
tively in human life.
The third reason is that the majority of leaders do
not have a universal goal. [.. .] They relate only to
their own group, not universal humanity. Actually,
some of them just think about themselves, their own
bodies, and their own life. If their bodies get what
they need and are satiated, they feel they earned the
reward from God, and they believe that they have
reached their goal. This kind of thing is so common
in our society that the organization and community
[such leaders] provide are broken into many parts;
even to the original condition before the leaders ar¬
rived. Their hearts are then so heavy [when they re¬
alize they have not succeeded].
The Road toward Unity
Leaders have understood the behavior, condition,
and traditions held by the people they lead, so as to
be able to proceed properly, that is, remembering
“the conditions of their own bodies.” Do not rush.
be clear, and understand which conditions are ac¬
ceptable and which ones to reject. Do not ever op¬
press and force people to speak and act against their
will. By following these suggestions, conditions for
effective communication will be established and
proceed to the goal itself, that is, the unity of human
hearts.
It is common in society that what is understood
and done in accordance with the teacher’s guidance,
a friend’s opinion, or personal preference will make
an individual happy. The advice will be followed
consistently, particularly when such advice was also
followed by their forebears. That advice is consid¬
ered as bringing happiness to those who believe and
causing suffering to those who are in denial. O leaders,
please look and see! Does this kind of thing occur only
in our own Muslim community? Buddhists, Chris¬
tians, and Jews are much the same, [I suspect,] much
the same as among Muslims; isn’t this true?
O leaders! Since “truth” is actually unified
(tawhidi), the question is how we obtain “truth” in
order not to be false before God Almighty.
People usually refuse a new way that is different
from what they have been following, because they
believe that the new way will cause unhappiness and
suffering, even though, in reality, the new matter will
actually bring happiness and pleasure. This refusal
will always occur, unless the [presenters of the new]
have the common interests of people at heart and
work for the universal human future.
Is the traditional conduct, described above, right
and good? Of course not, because such people only
use local tradition as their legal reference, while this
tradition should not be used as a determinant for
“good,” “bad,” “right,” and “wrong.” The reference
for those legal and ethical judgments is the holy heart.
This situation should be studied, perceived, and
pondered, because, in essence, happiness and un¬
happiness are at stake. Therefore. I call on leaders
to think together to bring human hearts together. If
this cannot be realized, the leaders will need to start
from themselves, by unifying their own hearts for
the interest of all people [as a precursor to the ef¬
fort in the wider community]. This is the real obli¬
gation for them.
O leaders! Let us come together in a common
place to speak the truth—without division, but for
all universally. Do not feel self-satisfied and indif¬
ferent, or else we will not discover the truth. After
that, let us promote one mode of conduct, one vi-
346 Achmad Dachlan
sion, and one mission. In short, all human beings
should be in agreement with united hearts, so that
they will attain happiness and realize the ultimate
purpose of life.
[One might ask] why people neglect or deny the
truth? Actually, there are several reasons:
1. Stupidity, which is very common.
2. Disagreement with the person bringing the truth.
3. Holding to traditional ways from forebears.
4. Fear of being separated from relatives and
friends.
5. Fear of losing honor, position, job status, plea¬
sure, and the like.
There are a few things to remember:
1. People need religion.
2. Originally, religion shines, but later it appears to
become dull. Truly, it is not religion that becomes
dull, but the person who follows the religion.
3. People should follow the rules made in accor¬
dance with the edicts of religious scholars. One
should never make decisions by oneself [in mat¬
ters of religion],
4. People must ever seek new knowledge. They
should never feel satisfied with their own knowl¬
edge, or ever refuse knowledge from others.
5. People need to apply the knowledge they have.
Do not let knowledge go wasted.
The Creature of God
All God’s creatures have destiny. Every destiny ex¬
tends toward a goal. And truly there must be a road
to that goal.
It is obvious that God creates time and the path
by which the goal can be reached. If this is so, then
the destiny of a creature can be attained by follow¬
ing its time and path. Indeed, every condition de¬
pends on God’s will, and God has provided all the
necessary conditions.
Humankind
Actually, humans want no destiny but safety and
happiness in this world and in the Hereafter.
The path for achieving human destiny requires
the use of common sense, that is, the common
intellect. A good intellect is characterized by the
ability to select with care and consideration, and to
place [the decision] in a courageous heart after se¬
lecting it.
Intellect
The nature of intellect is to accept all knowledge.
That knowledge becomes the passion of intellect,
because the intellect is like a seed in the earth. In
order for a seed to grow, the seed needs to be wa¬
tered and have all its needs fulfilled. Similarly, the
intellect will not grow properly without being show¬
ered by knowledge. And all of this is absolutely in
accordance with God’s will.
The Teaching of Logic
The teaching of logic is conducted through learning
‘ilm manthiq, the science of logic, which reflects
reality. This science can be gained only through the
learning and teaching process, because humans have
no other way to know names and languages without
teachers who got the knowledge from their teachers,
and so on. The [dependence on such learning] indi¬
cates that human beings have no power to know the
primary source of knowledge, except those who get
guidance from God Almighty.
Human beings who obtain more than basic prin¬
ciples of knowledge are like the person who takes jew¬
elry, makes a fastener, and then uses it as a decora¬
tion on an item of clothing. This means that a person
who can speak clearly and straight to the point, is ac¬
tually supported by the other knowledge he or she has.
So, it is not surprising that some people speak
very well and to the point. What is especially good
and helpful is when a person can accept or agree
with another’s good religious opinion and pass it on
to others. People should not be considered weak if
they do not add to the explanation that they re¬
ceived. Rather, they should be regarded as further¬
ing wisdom.
The Perfection of Intellect
There are six conditions for maintaining the perfect
intellect and keeping it functioning:
THE UNITY OF HUMAN LIFE 347
First of all, logic should base itself on love and
affection. Without this selection of love and affec¬
tion, a human will not reach ultimate wisdom. On
the other hand, a person with no love and affection
will only follow behavior that is guided by nega¬
tive emotional power.
The second is one’s struggle to gain the highest
happiness in this world and the Hereafter. This takes
serious effort, for it will not be attained without great
effort, and even sacrifices of a spiritual, financial,
emotional, and intellectual nature.
Third, the [intellectual] endeavor should be under¬
taken carefully, since “good” is often accompanied
by “bad.” Hence, sometimes, a person who seeks a
good thing gains a bad thing that should be refused.
This occurs especially when the seeker has no real
knowledge on the matter, but simply follows the tra¬
ditions of his community.
Next, the seeker should have good intentions with
regard to the matter under consideration, so that good
and strong motivation will keep his search on the
right path.
Fifth, the seeker of intellectual activity should take
care and give it full attention. This is very important,
because humans have a natural inclination to forget
and become careless.
Finally, the person undertaking the activity should
apply it properly. Knowledge will not bring a valu¬
able and meaningful result without being set in its
proper place.
Human Needs
Every individual in this world has personal needs. In
reality, no human being can exist properly without
support from others. Accordingly, every human being
should understand the relevance of such needs.
Actually, useful knowledge for the intellect and
brain is needed by human beings even more than food
is needed for the stomach to help grow physically.
Actually, seeking riches in the world is not as demand¬
ing as seeking knowledge to improve the spiritual
quality of one’s own behavior. In reality, we can find
that the number of people devoted to this [spiritual
improvement] is fewer than those who are less de¬
voted, and the number of people who understand in
principle is greater than those who manifest under¬
standing in real behavior. Therefore, even people with
perfect logic at their disposal need to understand by
searching within.
The Person with Accomplished Intellect
If human intellect falls into danger, there is an instru¬
ment in the human body that can control [the intel¬
lect], that is, the holy heart that consistently loves
spiritual serenity. It is an obligation that the person
with the accomplished intellect should avoid any risk
that would destroy the holiness of the heart.
The spiritual level of a good person is truly regu¬
lated by the holiness of one’s heart. A person will not
reach real happiness in this world and the Hereafter
without having exhibited behavior with an ethical
basis. Therefore, one who wants to be wise should
follow the road of wise people, that is, by striving to
defeat one’s own personal desires. In this way, one will
be able to behave in accordance with legal, ethical, and
aesthetic values, and will have a great opportunity to
attain real happiness in this world and the Hereafter,
as well as promoting spiritual serenity.
Therefore, it is obvious that those who want the
good life in this world and the Hereafter cannot at¬
tain it simply by following the desire for fun and
pleasure, or by being envious of the aims of others.
It is possible to attain enjoyment in this world, even
in very negative ways. But for genuine happiness in
the Hereafter, one must attach oneself to the positive
ways mentioned earlier.
The Difference between
"Smart" and “Stupid”
The words “smart” and “stupid” are contradictory in
meaning. For some people, however, they can have
similar meanings, that is, in actual life the smart and
the stupid person both like what they agree with and
hate what they dislike. [Hence, it is difficult to as¬
certain stupidity or smartness from those choices.]
Moreover, some matters that smart people can resolve
can also sometimes be resolved by stupid ones.
Therefore, it is necessary that a person with an ac¬
complished intellect be able to perceive the differ¬
ence between smart and stupid people.
Actually, the difference between the smart and stu¬
pid person can be seen clearly when they appear to-
348 Achmad Dachlan
gether. In this situation, the smart man will look con¬
fident, while the stupid one looks shaky and uncertain.
Actually there are three differences between them.
The first is that the smart person absolutely under¬
stands what will lead him to happiness or to suffer¬
ing, while the stupid person does not.
The smart person will, of course, always try to
seek the right road toward real happiness, and to
avoid the situation that will lead to unhappiness or
suffering. The smart person who neglects God’s
guidance and follows personal desires will gradu¬
ally fall into danger and suffering.
48
Syekh Ahmad Surkati
Ijtihad and Taqlid
Syekh Ahmad Surkati (Sudan-Java, 1872-1943) was an educator, intellectual, and busi¬
nessman. Originally from a pious family in the Sudan, he received a traditional Muslim
education in Egypt and then studied extensively in Medina and Mecca; later he received
a diploma from an institution in Istanbul. He lived in Malaya and Sumatra before being
summoned to teach at the Arab Benevolent Society’s school in Jakarta at the age of thirty-
four. Later he was a leader of the Union for Reformation and Guidance, generally known
as al-lrsyad, which promoted modernist Muslim teachings in the schools that it founded.
Surkati’s wntings on Islam are reflective of those of Muhammad 'Abduh (chapter 3), and
his work was highly regarded among the Muslim modernist community in Java of his day.
Not being a sayyid (descendant of the Prophet), he was at odds with the sayyid- domi¬
nated Arab population that dominated the Arab community in Southeast Asia. Some of
his writing concentrated on the equality found in Islam and the lack of religious Justifica¬
tion for special status for those from the Prophet's Quraysh tribe, or for those descended
from the Prophet. He was especially attacked by sayyids and Qurayshis, who regarded
him as an upstart with poor breeding. Perhaps in defense, Surkati made far more use of
Qur’anic verses in justifying his arguments than did other Southeast Asian modernists of
the period, The work chosen here for translation centers on the essentia! difference
between traditionalists and modernists in their examination of religious sources,
Ijtihad means to expend effort and capacity in some¬
thing which involves some difficulty. As a jurispru¬
dential term it means to derive shari ‘a laws from
logical proofs and detailed general principles, that
is, the ability to go into further detail or to choose
one of two laws laid down in writing by following
one of the procedures for choosing between laws rec¬
ognized by the foundations of jurisprudence, such as:
that its narrators are more numerous, although equal
in characteristics of justice and respect; that the chain
of authorities of the hadith [tradition of the Prophet]
is stronger; that it is a saying which has the poten¬
tial for specific action; that it is more detailed; that
it is more intelligible; that it is in the Qurayshi dia¬
lect; that it came after the hijra [the exodus of
Muslims from Mecca in 622 that marks the begin¬
ning of the Islamic era]; that it is universal; that it
is derived from original law; that it is a plausible
report; that it is consistent with another proof, or
with the action of the people of Medina; that it is
more secure in the area of rights; or better prevents
the imposition of punishments; or lightens the bur¬
den of observing the precepts of religion and devo¬
tional observances, or is more apposite as a means;
or better prevents harm; or better lifts restrictions;
or it is more conducive to acceptance in the area of
calling people to religion.
If all this is understood, then one knows that there
can be no ijtihad when there is a clear text that is not
contradicted by an equivalent one; nor where it is not
known whether one of the laws falls under one of the
principles of the shari ‘a —in the first case because
the law is definite and there is no ijtihad in definite
matters, and in the second case because something
Syekh Ahmad Surkati, Al-Masa’il al-thalath (The Three
Questions) (Cairo, Egypt: Dar al-‘Ulum li’l-Tiba‘a, 1977),
pp. 19-36. First published in 1925. Translation from Ara¬
bic by Natalie Mobini-Kesheh. Introduction by Howard M.
Federspiel.
1. Natalie Mobini-Kesheh, The Hadrami Awakening:
Community and Identity in the Netherlands East Indies.
1900-1942 (Ithaca. N.Y.: Cornell University Southeast Asia
Program Publications, 2000), pp. 71-90; Deliar Noer, The
Modernist Muslim Movement in Indonesia, 1900-1942
(Singapore: Oxford University Press, 1973), pp. 61-69;
“Syekh Ahmad Soorkati,” Ensiklopedi Islam (The Encyclo¬
pedia of Islam ) (Jakarta, Indonesia: Ichtiar Baru van Hoeve,
1993), volume 4, pp. 280-284.
349
350 Syekh Ahmad Surkati
is not lawful if it does not fall under one of the prin¬
ciples of the shari‘a.
Thus adhering to that which is established by God
and His Prophet, and making appeal to the Book of
God and the surma of His Prophet, this is Islam. In
His word the most high: “So hold fast to the revela¬
tion given to you. You are truly on a straight path.”
[Sura 43, Verse 43] In His word the most high: “So,
you and those who turned to God with you, should
walk along the straight path, as you have been com¬
manded, and do not transgress.” [Sura 11, Verse 112]
In His word the most high: “Follow the revelation
given to you by your Lord, and do not follow any
other lord apart than Him.” [Sura 7, Verse 3] In His
word the most high: “We have sent down to you the
Book containing the truth, in whose light you should
judge among the people as God has shown you.”
[Sura 4, Verse 105] In His word the most high: “Hold
firmly to what We have given you, and remember
what is therein, that you make take heed.” [Sura 2,
Verse 63] In His word the most high: “This is My
straight path, so walk along, and do not follow other
ways, lest you should turn away from the right one.
All this has He commanded. You may perhaps take
heed for yourselves.” [Sura 6, Verse 153] In His word
the most high: “Accept what the Messenger gives
you, and refrain from what he forbids.” [Sura 59,
Verse 7]
As for ijtihad in religion—that is, expending ef¬
fort and contemplating the Book of God and the
surma of His Prophet (peace be upon him), and adapt¬
ing the established laws to them—this is an obliga¬
tion on every rational person who understands the
Arabic language and has knowledge of the scope of
the law.
In His word the most high: “Give glad tidings to
my creatures. Those who listen to the Word, and then
follow the best it contains, are the ones who have been
guided by God, and are people of wisdom.” [Sura 39,
Verses 17-18] “The best” means the most appropri¬
ate according to the situation, time, and place, and the
strongest in its chain of transmission and as a proof,
and the most logical. It is known that whosoever does
not expend effort in contemplation and reflection is
not able to distinguish between the good and the best.
In His word the most high: “Hold fast to what We have
given you, and remember what is therein, that you
make take heed.” [Sura 2, Verse 63]
Whosoever does not expend effort in reflection
will not adhere strongly to what is in the Book, as
God commands him, and will not bear its contents
in mind. In His word the most high: “We have sent
down a Book to you which is blessed, so that people
may apply their minds to its revelations, and people
of wisdom may reflect.” [Sura 38, Verse 29] From
this it is clear that God revealed the Book in order
that we may reflect on its contents.
In His word the most high: “Do they not ponder
on what the Qur’an says? Or have their hearts been
sealed with locks?” [Sura 47, Verse 24] This is a stem
reproach to whosoever turns away from the Qur’an
and does not reflect on its contents. In His word the
most high: “And hold on firmly together to the rope
of God, and be not divided among yourselves.” [Sura
3, Verse 103] It is inconceivable that people would
cling to it and hold fast to its laws if they do not know
what it contains. God has commanded that we have
recourse to His Book and to the surma of His Prophet
when there are differences and contention. In His
word the most high: “In whatever matter you dis¬
agree, the ultimate judgment rests with God.” [Sura
42, Verse 10]
In His word the most high: “Should you disagree
about something, refer it to God and the Messenger,
if you believe in God and the Last Day. This is good
for you and the best of settlements.” [Sura 4, Verse
59] It is not possible for us to have recourse to the
Book of God and the surma of His Prophet unless we
are familiar with them both and contemplate what
they contain. In His word the most high: “Say, ‘My
way, and that of my followers, is to call you to God
on evidence as clear as seeing with one’s own eyes.’”
[Sura 12, Verse 108] There is no doubt that whoso¬
ever does not know what the Prophet brought can¬
not invite people to God “on evidence as clear as the
seeing with one’s eyes,”’ because seeing is the proof
and evidence and there is no proof in the hand of the
blind follower.
In His word the most high “We have surely sent
apostles with clear signs, and sent with them the
Book and the Balance [the scales of right and wrong],
so that people may stand by justice.” [Sura 57, Verse
25] There is no doubt that those who do not have the
Book and the Balance in their hand cannot stand by
justice, and that if by chance someday they may stand
by justice, it is without seeing with their own eyes.
In His word the most high: “And We have indeed
made the Qur’an easy to understand. So is there any
one who will be warned?” [Sura 54. Verse 17] That
is, whosoever searches for its meanings will be as-
IJTIHAD AND TAQLID 35 I
sisted. In His word the most high: “And we have
revealed to you the Book as an exposition of every
thing.” [Sura 16, Verse 89] “Has the time not yet
come when the hearts of believers should be moved
by the thought of God and the truth that has been sent
down, so that they should not be like those who re¬
ceived the Book before them but whose hearts were
hardened after a lapse of time? [Sura 57, Verse 16]
[. . .] How clear have We made Our signs for those
who understand.” [Sura 6, Verse 98]
As for those who engage in taqlid, following a
particular person blindly in all matters of religion, in
such a manner that they prefer what that person says
over what is fixed in the Book and the sunna, on the
pretext that that person knows more than others, or
that he is acquainted with the proofs of religion, de¬
spite the fact that they themselves are rational and
free to choose and able to comprehend evidence, this
is prohibited by reason and by law, according to the
text of the Book and the sunna , and according to the
ways of the Companions of the Prophet and the suc¬
ceeding generation and the renowned imams
[founders of the major legal schools in Sunni Islam].
God has told us that such individuals are more lost
than cattle. For cattle are not given this capacity,
while God has given the capacity to humans, but they
do not use it. They refuse to be anything but cattle.
In His word the most high in the Sura of the Wall
Between Heaven and Hell: “Many of the jinns [spirit
beings] and human beings have We destined for Hell,
who possess hearts but do not feel, have eyes but do
not see, have ears but do not hear—like cattle, even
worse than them, for they are unconcerned.” [Sura
7, Verse 179]
Indeed God, the most glorious, has censured those
who in past times engaged in taqlid of their forefa¬
thers and leaders in their religion, and who turned
away from the divine proofs, and who relied on the
baseless ideas that they inherited from their forefa¬
thers and ancestors. God relates to us their rebuke so
that we will learn a lesson from their mistakes. In
disgust and condemnation, in His word the most high
in the Sura of the Cow: “When it is said to them:
‘Follow what God has revealed,’ they say: ‘No, we
shall follow only the ways of our fathers’—even
though their fathers had no wisdom or guidance!”
[Sura 2, Verse 170] In His word the most high in the
Sura of The Feast: “When you say to them: ‘Come
to what God has revealed, and the Prophet,’ they say:
‘Sufficient to us is the faith that our fathers had fol¬
lowed,’ even though their fathers had no knowledge
or guidance.” [Sura 5, Verse 104] In His word the
most high in the Sura of Luqman: “When you ask
them to follow what God has revealed, they say: ‘No.
We shall follow what we found our ancestors follow¬
ing,” Even though the devil were calling them to the
torment of Hell!” [Sura 31, Verse 21] In His word
the most high in the Sura of the Allied Troops: “And
they will say: ‘O our Lord, we obeyed our leaders
and elders, but they only led us astray. O our Lord,
give them a double punishment, and put a grievous
curse upon them.” [Sura 33, Verse 67-68] In His
word the most high in the Sura of the Ornaments of
Gold: “Thus, whenever We sent an admonisher to a
people before you, the decadent among them said:
‘We found our fathers following this way, and we are
walking in their footsteps.” [Sura 43, Verse 23] “He
said: ‘Even if I bring you better guidance than the
one you found your fathers following?”’ [Sura 43,
Verse 24]
Whosoever opposes a verse of the Qur’an or the
confirmed sunna of the Messenger of God (peace be
upon him) is following the design of those who God
rebukes in the Qur’an, and is deserving of the proper
punishment, because all judgments and punishments
and rewards and recompense are indeed in accor¬
dance with attributes and not with the essence of
individuals. In His word the most high: “It is not
dependent on your wishes, nor the wishes of the
people of the Book, [but] whosoever does ill will be
punished for it, and will find no protector or friend
apart from God.” [Sura 4, Verse 123] In His word the
most high: “Are the unbelievers among you any bet¬
ter than they? Or is there immunity for you in the
Scriptures?” [Sura 54, Verse 43] In His word the most
high: “Or have you a Book in which you read that
you can surely have whatever you choose?” [Sura 68,
Verses 37-38] “This is the law of God that has pre¬
vailed among His creatures. [Sura 40, Verse 85] [... ]
You will not find any change in the law of God.”
[Sura 48, Verse 23]
[...] It is understood from all this that the blind
taqlid that is taking place today is not permissible,
except for the simple person who is possessed of no
understanding or knowledge, and no inclination and
no reason. Ijtihad in understanding the Book and the
sunna is obligatory upon every person who possesses
understanding, and whose circumstances afford the
opportunity, in every time and place, to the best of
one’s ability. In the sense that we see it used today,
352 Syekh Ahmad Surkati
taqlid is contrary to reason and humanity, contrary
to the Book and the surma, contrary to the consen¬
sus of the Companions of the Prophet, and contrary
to the instructions of the imams whom those prac¬
ticing taqlid claim to be imitating. Its perpetrators
who have the capacity to understand the Book of God
and the surma of His Messenger are sinners who fab¬
ricate a lie against God, who speak against God that
which they do not know. In His word the most high:
“Do not utter the lies your tongues make up: ‘This is
lawful, and this is forbidden,’ in order to impute lies
to God. For they who impute lies to God will not find
fulfilment.” [Sura 16, Verse 116] In His word the
most high: “Tell them: ‘My Lord has forbidden re¬
pugnant acts, whether open or disguised, sin and
unjust oppression, associating others with God with
which He has sent down no authority, and saying
things of God of which you have no knowledge.’”
[Sura 7, Verse 33] God said to His Prophet: “Do not
follow that of which you have no knowledge. Ver¬
ily the ear, the eye, the heart, each will be questioned
[on Judgment Day].” [Sura 17, Verse 36]
Those who perform taqlid say: In the religion of
God we do not use our ears, our eyes, or our hearts,
nor do we pursue knowledge. Rather, we pursue the
opinion of so-and-so and so-and-so. In His word the
most high: “We have given examples of every kind
for people, in this Qur’an, so that they may contem¬
plate. every kind of Parable in order that they may
receive admonition. A clear discourse which expounds
all things without any crookedness, so that they may
take heed for themselves.” [Sura 39, Verses 27-28]
Those who perform taqlid say: The Qur’an is not
comprehensible and our minds are not adequate to
understand it. So they made it inaccessible in vaults
and contented themselves with repetition of its
sounds, without the reflection that God commanded.
In this they follow the habits of those who preceded
them. The example uttered by God in the Sura of the
Congregation is applicable to them. In His word the
most high: “The likeness of those who were charged
with [the law of] the Torah, which they did not ob¬
serve, is that of a donkey who carries a load of books
[oblivious of what they contain].” [Sura 62, Verse 5]
God says to His servants: “So be not like those
who became disunited and differed among them¬
selves after clear proofs had come to them. For them
is great suffering.” [Sura 3, Verse 105] In His word
the most high: “As for those who have created
schisms in their order, and formed different sects, you
have no concern with them.” [Sura 6, Verse 159] In
His word the most high: “And hold on firmly together
to the rope of God, and be not divided among your¬
selves.” [Sura 3, Verse 103] Those who perform
taqlid say: Our divisions are a blessing. They say, we
adhere to the words of so-and-so and so-and-so, ir¬
respective of the Book of God, and we refer what¬
ever causes contention among us to the words of
whomever we have chosen to be our imam, irrespec¬
tive of God and His Messenger, and whatever we
have differences about, we seek judgment on it from
so-and-so and so-and-so. Thus they are divided and
scattered. Each party is delighted with what it has,
and every group claims the superiority of what it has,
without reason or proof or guidance or the luminous
Book.
God revealed His Book to creation and He said
in it: “Verily there are signs in this for people of
understanding.” [Sura 20, Verse 128] Those who
perform taqlid say: We are not among those emdued
with understanding. In His word the most high: “So
take heed, O people with eyes!” [Sura 59, Verse 2]
So they say: We are not among those with eyes to
see. In His word the most high: “There are surely
signs in these things for those who understand.” [Sura
13, Verse 4] So they say, we are not among those who
understand.
Indeed those who perform taqlid are not content
to bear the shame of apathy and ignorance. They do
not merely confess that they are not seekers of knowl¬
edge, or endowed with understanding and reason.
They even seek shade under the shadow of apathy
and laziness and happily endure the shame of resist¬
ing the Book of God and the surma of His Messen¬
ger, peace be upon him. They put the Book of God
behind their backs. On top of all this, they denounce
the people of virtue and knowledge and reason, who
hold fast to the Book and the surma, and they accuse
them of bid'a [innovation] and deviation. How
strange that the blind denounce the seeing, the deaf
denounce the hearing, the stupid protest against the
intelligent, the wise, and the able, and the lost resent
the rightly guided ones! By God, this is terrible news
and an unjust verdict.
[.. .] Those who perform taqlid are generally di¬
vided into three groups.
First: those who have the capacity and opportu¬
nity to understand the proofs of God and His laws,
but do not use their mind to understand the Book of
God and the surma of His Messenger. They do not
IJTIHAD AND TAQLID 353
reflect on them, nor do they want to listen to them.
God refers to such people in the Sura of the Wall
Between Heaven and Hell. In His word the most
high: “Many of the /inns and human beings have We
destined for Hell, who possess hearts but do not feel,
have eyes but do not see, have ears but do not hear—
like cattle, even worse than them, for they are uncon¬
cerned.” [Sura 7, Verse 179]
Second: those who do not have the capacity to
understand arguments by themselves, or who lack the
opportunity to undertake the obligation of contem¬
plation and reflection on the Book and the sunna and
to memorize what they say. Such people are com¬
manded by the Lawgiver to ask the people of knowl¬
edge about the laws brought by God and His Mes¬
senger, in accordance with their need. In His word
the most high: “If you do not know, then ask the
keepers of the oracles of God.” [Sura 16, Verse 43]
In the words of the Prophet, peace be upon him:
“Verily, the cure for incapacity is to ask.” But he
should not ask the knowledgeable person for his
opinion. Rather, he should ask him about the laws
he has memorized from God and His Messenger, and
ask for his help in understanding whatever is diffi¬
cult for him to understand.
Third: those who are simple and barely able to
understand speech, and who cannot comprehend ar¬
guments. Such people have no alternative but to
undertake absolute taqlid, because God does not
expect from anyone more than they are capable of.
But they are obliged at least to ask the knowledge¬
able person who they imitate whether the ruling he
gives is based on his own opinion, in which case
other opinions exist as well, or whether it is from God
and His Messenger. They should not be fanatical
toward a particular imam or religious official, be¬
cause of the possibility that they may meet one later
who is more knowledgeable or more correct than the
one they met first. If they are fanatical toward a cer¬
tain individual and prefer him above others without
reason, or give preference to his opinion over the
opinion of someone who is higher than him, then they
are just following their own desire. Those who per¬
form taqlid are not obliged to follow one school, as
confirmed by Ibn Burhan [probably Burhanuddin
Marghinani, died circa 1197], [Muhyi al-Din] al-
Nawawi [1233-1277], Ahmad ibn Hanbal [780-
855], and others, except that they should not switch
from the sayings of the first religious authority they
follow unless there is sound reason to do so.
[.. .] It is said that the prerequisites for a consum¬
mate mujtahid [religious scholar] are that he be
knowledgeable about all that relates to the laws from
the texts of the Book and the sunna. This refers to
approximately 500 clear and manifest verses from the
Book, according to [Abu Hamid Muhammad] al-
Ghazzali [1058-1 111] and [Muhyi al-Din] Ibn ‘Arabi
[1165-1240], and others, and similarly with hadith.
In the opinion of Imam Ahmad [ibn Hanbal, 780-
855], it relates to 1200 hadith. In fact it is even more
than that, as al-Nawawi and others have said. It is not
obligatory to memorize them or to keep them in one’s
mind, but rather what is intended is the ability to refer
to them, and awareness of what is in the books. He
should also be familiar with matters of consensus, so
that he does not breach it. What is intended is the
consensus of all the Companions or all the mujtahids
who meet the prerequisites in the age, not just the four
well-known ones [that is, the founders of the four
major Sunni legal schools].
In addition he should know the Arabic tongue and
its principles of grammar, syntax, inflection, and
rhetoric sufficiently well to interpret what is said in
the Book and the sunna, if necessary in consultation
with others. It is not an obligation to memorize, but
rather the ability to consult and understand is suffi¬
cient. He should also be knowledgeable in the roots
of jurisprudence and the verses of the Book and the
sunna that abrogate others, and those that are abro¬
gated. It is generally said that these [abrogated
sources] are five verses from the Book and ten hadith
from the sunna, but it is also said that the hadith
number 25 and the verses are more than that. Further¬
more, he should be knowledgeable of the circum¬
stances of those who related the hadith and their ter¬
minology. The mujtahid does not need to perform
ijtihad in all matters, but only those in which it is
necessary, and only those matters in which he is able
to perform ijtihad, for this is the truth.
Nobody says that a single imam is thoroughly
familiar with everything that the Lawgiver has
brought. Nor is there anyone who is able to master
the sunna of the Messenger of God, peace be upon
him. This is said by [Abu ‘Abdullah Muhammad]
ShafTi [767-820], and it is the opinion of the ma¬
jority as related by al-Safi al-Hindi [‘Ala’ al-Din al-
Hindi al-Baqi al-Shafi‘i, died 1315]. It is the favored
opinion, as Ibn Daqiq al-‘Aid [1228-1302] recalled.
Al-Ghazzali agreed on this, and so did [Abu'l Qadir]
al-Rafa’i [al-Qazwini, died 1226] and others.
354 Syekh Ahmad Surkati
The Book takes precedence over the sunna when
there is contradiction, due to its greater constancy
and the certainty of its correctness, and sunna with
continuous succession takes precedence over that
which is related by only one person. There are de¬
grees in this which can be known from the books
on hadith. Similarly, the consensus of the Compan¬
ions takes precedence over those following them,
because the latter are not based on the text. Then
follows the consensus of the mujtahids of a given
era, but only those who have indicated their reason¬
ing. Then follows analogy in accordance with the
reason on which a judgment is based, and then there
is basic freedom. If the ijtihads of a mujtahid at
different times contradict each other, or the ijtihads
of two mujtahids on the same matter contradict each
other, then truly the truth is with one of them, as
Malik [ibn Anas, 710-796] and [Abu ‘Abdullah
Muhammad] al-Shafi‘i [767-820], and Abu Hanifa
[circa 699-767] say. The mujtahid is rewarded in
any case, as confirmed in this hadith of the Prophet,
peace be upon him: “If a judge performs ijtihad and
he is correct, then he is due two rewards; and if he
performs ijtihad and he is wrong, then he is due one
reward.”
The foregoing demonstrates that the taqlid which
is criticized by God and His Messenger and the
imams, and which we criticize following them, is not
criticized for deriving law based on reasoning from
trustworthy authorities, nor for having a good opin¬
ion of the well-known ‘ulama ’ [religious scholars]
with regard to what they quote to us from God and
His Messenger, nor for following their guiding prin¬
ciple in the derivation of law, nor for respecting their
consensus. Rather, the taqlid which is censured in¬
volves depending on a saying that one has no evi¬
dence for, or to refer to the saying of a particular
imam in all religious rulings, in such manner that one
rejects anything contrary to it and accepts anything
in agreement with it, solely on the pretext that that
imam is more knowledgeable than others, or that he
memorized a shari ‘ a reason for every ruling, even
though it is not evident and one does not remember
it oneself. There is no doubt that this pretext is base¬
less. It is not right for people to judge the learning of
a knowledgeable person or his memorization of rea¬
sons for every ruling that he has made, unless they
know the proofs put forward by others. This requires
people to be more knowledgeable than them all, so
that they are able to judge between them. There is
no doubt that confirming one piece of reasoning is
simpler and easier than giving preference to one
imam over others. Indeed, every person who takes a
confidant other than God, and declares permissible
whatever he permits, and declares unlawful whatever
he declares unlawful, without considering a shari ‘a
reason, has taken a master as a deity other than God.
The reasoning for this is His word the most high:
“They consider their priests and their monks to be
gods apart from God.” [Sura 9, Verse 31]
According to the interpretation of the Messenger,
peace be upon him, as related by ‘Adi Ibn Hatim
[companion of the Prophet, died circa 687]: “The
Messenger of God, may God’s blessing and peace be
upon him, when he concluded this verse, said: ‘They
consider their priests and their monks to be gods apart
from God.’ I said, ‘O Messenger of God, we have not
taken priests.’ And the Messenger said, ‘Do they not
permit to you what has been forbidden, and you per¬
mit it, and they forbid you from that which has been
permitted, and you forbid it?’ I said, ‘Yes.’ He said,
‘So this is worshiping them.’”
This applies to those who perform taqlid, who
understand reason but put forward the saying of the
person they imitate, on the pretext that he knows
more about the situation or is more knowledgeable
or understands better the reasons in this matter.
[...] It is not our purpose, in opening the door of
ijtihad, to confirm that it is permissible to breach the
consensus put forward by the imams, nor to invali¬
date what they said. The purpose is to confirm that it
is obligatory to take from their words that which is
confirmed by reason, and not that which has weak
reasoning, and to confirm the prohibition on fanati¬
cism and on the claim that truth or the predominance
of reason is limited to only one of the schools of law.
It is to urge people to adhere to the Book of God and
the sunna of His Messenger, and to refer their dis¬
agreements to them both and to nothing else, as God
instructs them.
49
Hadji Agus Salim
Asian Dawn
Hadji Agus Salim (Sumatra-Java, 1884-1954) was a Muslim political activist, journalist,
and intellectual. He was bom in a state functionary's family, attended Dutch colonial
schools, and was one ofa few Indonesians to graduate from the technical school in Batavia.
He worked with the Dutch consulate in Arabia for a time assisting stranded pilgrims and
acting as a point of contact with Indonesian students studying there. Afterward he joined
the Sarekat Islam (Islamic Association) political movement, serving as one of its primary
leaders for twenty-fve years, even representing it in the Dutch-run People's Council. He
was an important journalist, and also sponsored the Jong Islamieten Bond (Young Mus¬
lims Union), an organization for Indonesian students in Dutch schools to learn and dis¬
cuss Islamic teachings, which produced a generation of leaders for Muslim organizations.
After independence in 1945, he was a cabinet member in the first Indonesian cabinet.
Salim's writing centered on the political issues of the day, particularly the shortcomings
of Dutch colonialism, the threat of communism, and the dangers of nationalism not based
on Islam, He was an important spokesman for Islamic nationalism and attempted to pro¬
mote Islamic unity within Indonesia and throughout the world. In the selections presented
here, two newspaper articles, Salim described his movement’s modernist reforms and
criticized the Dutch for running a colonial system lacking the democratic process and
human rights that were observed in the Netherlands itself
Economics, Social Concerns, and Politics
In general our people do not receive much formal
education, and those that attend schools receive in¬
sufficient amounts of inadequate knowledge; they
learn only to read and write at a basic level, but in¬
tellectual development and skills are not obtained at
all. The traditional manner of gaining knowledge is
lacking, nor does a modem means appear either.
Also, not even the number of our people who have
finished schools, from elementary to higher educa¬
tion, is known. Further, those people do not... ob¬
tain any knowledge of their own people, our origins
and culture, and our social relationships. Rather,
everything they study is alien. It is natural then that
Hadji Agus Salim, “Ekonomi, Sosial dan Polidk” (Econom¬
ics, Social Concerns, and Politics) and “Haji Agus Salim
Berbahaya?” (Is Haji Agus Salim Dangerous?), Fadjar Asia
(Asian Dawn), February 13-15, 1929, and February 20, 1930.
Translation from Indonesian by Emi Haryanti Kahfi. Intro¬
duction by Howard M. Federspiel.
1. Emi Haryanti Kahfi, “Islam and Indonesian Nation¬
alism: The Political Thought of Haji Agus Salim,” Studio
Islamika , volume 4, number 3, 1997, pp. 1-64; Deliar Noer,
our people simply become imitators [of Western
manners and ways of doing things], even though they
are not able to examine the origins of the things which
they imitate. In [Islamic] religious terms this is
known as taqlid [imitation].
It is the nature of taqlid to misunderstand. The
essence of a matter is not known, but only the super¬
ficial label or name. Such people have much in com¬
mon with the parrot, the animal which is cleverly able
to imitate several words, and make it appear that it
has mastered the matter, while it is only coinciden¬
tally mastering the labels. Obviously, the parrot’s
mind cannot understand each word and the meanings
conveyed.
Consequently, our people generally have limited
perceptions of the three words written above; “eco-
The Modernist Muslim Movement in Indonesia, 1900-1942
(Singapore: Oxford University Press. 1973), pp. 120-275;
G. F. Pijper, Studien over de geschiedenis van de Islam in In¬
donesia 1900-1950 (Studies on the History of Islam in Indo¬
nesia, 1900-1950) (Leiden, Netherlands: E. J. Brill, 1977),
pp. 141-144; Takashi Shiraishi, An Age in Motion: Popular
Radicalism in Java, 1912-1926 (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell Uni¬
versity Press, 1990).
355
356 Hadji Agus Salim
noniics, social, and politics.” This is because each
word is understood in a particular and limited way.
This happens not only among the uneducated or less
educated, but also among the educated and the stu¬
dents who are now acknowledged as intelligentsia;
almost all of them have limited understanding of the
terms.
For example, “economics” is defined as a matter
of property income; so a “bank,” which is referred
to as a “national bank,” is regarded as the key to
improving our economics, because the bank is con¬
tinually referred to as the instrument for managing
dividends or profit sharing among company partners.
There are people who regard “our economics” as
related to a “financial company,” who do not perceive
that the Bank of the Netherlands is not really a na¬
tional bank of the Dutch people. In the same way,
the Bank of England is not a national bank of En¬
glishmen, and the Banque de France is not a national
bank of Frenchmen. Rather, within these three coun¬
tries people understand that these banks are “capital
companies,” which draw together the assets of many
people from wide economic groups and entrust it to
a small group of capitalists who ran the bank.
On the other hand, the efforts and actions of the
P. S. I. [Partai Sareikat Islam, Islamic Union Party]
are designed to hinder the loss of lands of native
people due to them by the law of land ownership and
at the same time demand the return of thousands of
bau [a bau is 0.7 hectares, or 1.7 acres] of lands, from
which millions of rupiahs are diverted. [.. .] This
effort [and the benefit it entails] is not understood as
a meaningful economic effort; actually, it deeply
concerns the economics of our fellow countrymen.
Economics has great meaning to us. Although we
have not yet achieved great success with our efforts,
it is at least useful to liberate minds and understand
that our economy has been surrendered and depends
on the alien nation that mles us, that is, the Nether¬
lands. At the same time, it is now generally accepted
that there are two goals that should be achieved si¬
multaneously, that is, to gain control of our own eco¬
nomics and to remove the power of foreign capital
in our economics.
Among us are those who take great pride in the
collection of national resources in a national bank.
However, these people do not regard the effort of the
P. S. I. in challenging land inheritance laws as an
effort to maintain national capital, which demon¬
strates how unappreciated its value really is.
The P. S. I. opposition to usury can be regarded
as having great meaning for our economics, espe¬
cially for those who want to think and understand
this. Although there is no [legal] prohibition for
people to engage in usury, the opposition will raise
the consciousness and hostility of native people
against companies associated with usury, such as
pawnshops and installment-loan establishments. This
inner hostility will then become a fertile base for
people to establish their own companies [not rely¬
ing on usurious practice] to replace these offending
companies.
The foregoing constitutes our explanation of our
economic understanding and direction, which is
broader than the narrow understanding of taqlid.
Regarding social perceptions, generally speaking,
those who engage in taqlid also do not have a wide
view. Social awareness is interpreted in a very nar¬
row sense, that is, helping people overcome misery,
especially through the use of hospitals, disease con¬
trol, establishing poor houses and orphanages, giv¬
ing assistance to the poor, and founding schools to
overcome ignorance.
Therefore, an organization which undertakes three
or four kinds of social work is given the designation
of “social institution... .” As such institutions are
currently defined in our motherland, social activities
that take place in such institutions consist of rela¬
tively unimportant activities, often intended to pro¬
mote [narrow] social relationships or colonialism.
Therefore, [those practicing taqlid] do not really
perceive the meaning of the P. S. I.’s social movement
in collecting zakat [alms tax], improving [Islamic]
marriage procedures, and developing our own educa¬
tional system, all of which are based on religion. The
[effort here in structuring such institutions] is to as¬
sist in lessening difficulties among social classes
caused by national identity or social hierarchies. Their
ignorance centers on a lack of understanding concern¬
ing the meaning of “social” and “improvement,” that
is, by truly living in a social environment and confront¬
ing all the malfunctioning of social relationships.
Actually, both confrontation and subsequent improve¬
ment has to spring from a [popularly established so¬
cial] network that focuses on establishing households
and education of children.
Consequently, the social activities mentioned
earlier, which make things worse, [can be shifted]
to strengthen social conditions that spring from the
ruined social foundation of this colonial land.
ASIAN DAWN 357
However, we need not continue this explanation
further. The foregoing is sufficient for those who
want to continue musing on this matter.
Finally we come to politics.
Here the practitioners of taqlid believe that poli¬
tics compels us to become involved in the political
arena and to confront the power holders [that is, the
Dutch]. This viewpoint maintains that a political
party focuses its action on government and sover¬
eignty, and [especially] on seizing sovereignty by
force. This “blind and deaf’ perception is accompa¬
nied by the corollary that if sufficient power is lack¬
ing to achieve this goal, it should be put aside. In its
place, attention should be given to “economic devel¬
opment” or “social development” as an initial step.
They forget that in this colonial land, economic and
social development are closely tied to the success of
Dutch authority. As a result, every effort to imitate
economic and social development [for ourselves],
even though intended to be in competition with Dutch
authority, actually strengthens the Dutch economic
and social system itself. This can clearly be seen in the
efforts among Protestants and Catholic missionaries,
and the spread of Theosophist propaganda, all of
which support colonialism. So it is evident that any
association or institution that undertakes efforts in
those fields will become part of the colonialist en¬
deavor. Similarly, the competition among the various
Dutch banks and large Dutch corporations strength¬
ens an economic environment that serves as the foun¬
dation of present-day colonialism. Consequendy, there
is no doubt that every effort undertaken in the name
of [Indonesian] nationalism is a part of that economic
environment, which intensifies the strength of the [co¬
lonial] environment itself.
Actually, “Dutch control” rests on the prevailing
laws and political authority that operate in this colo¬
nial land. Therefore, every [. ..] effort that recognizes
such “control” and at the same time attempts to re¬
move it through competition, then has to face the
pitfalls of the law and the political authority behind
it. As a result, any of our social and economic move¬
ments emphasizing our nationalistic cause have to be
involved in politics in order not to be mere tools of
the foreign colonial power.
This is our explanation, which must be acknowl¬
edged as correct and clear for any group that is
thoughtful and intelligent, and which realizes that it
needs to resist worldly temptation, such as profit or
happiness, that may be associated with it. Surely this
foregoing explanation illustrates that in this colonial
land, economics, social welfare, and politics cannot
be separated. Therefore, all Muslims in this colonial
land would find these three aspects in the Islamic
Union Party. This is because Islam as religion, the
foundation of this party, carries the foundation for
the regulation and improvement of every aspect of
life, economics, social, and political, as well as oth¬
ers which exist and intermingle in human life.
Is H. A. Salim Dangerous?
When I was in the Netherlands I made connections
to enhance our labor and nationalist movements here.
I made an agreement with the Netherlands Vak
Verbond (N. V. V.) [Netherlands Trade Federation].
This Netherlands labor organization, consisting of
several related organizations with a total membership
of 240,000 members, indicated that they would take
an interest in and provide support for our labor move¬
ment here. They would help provide some things we
don’t have and strengthen other things we do have.
In the election to the Second Chamber [of the Dutch
parliament in 1929], the Social Democratic Party
(S. D. A. P.), received more than 800,000 votes, out
of total of 3,000,000 voters, which means that it was
supported by almost a quarter of the population of
Netherlands; it gained 24 seats in the parliament as
a result. The party acknowledged the right of the
Indonesian people to freedom in our own country,
and I received assurances that the party would sup¬
port our national movement to obtain that freedom.
Support from those two movements requires that
such aid and assistance will not be given to those who
oppose their own basic positions. Clearly the labor
and national-political movements are adamantly
opposed to the communist movement and Bolshe¬
vism affiliated with Moscow. For me, as it is certainly
stated in [the platforms of the] Islamic Union Party
itself, the movement is not in accord with the plat¬
form and thinking of the Moscow movement, so that
condition is not a hindrance [to our cooperation with
the Dutch organizations].
So it happened that when I departed from the
Netherlands I reviewed the promises of the two Neth¬
erlands labor organizations in an article sent to the
magazine De Strijd [the Struggle ], that is an organ
of the NVV, which is read by all 240,000 members
of that organization. In the article I outlined the in-
358 Hadji Agus Salim
terests of our movement here, so that our actions in
conducting such a movement would be known and
appreciated by modern labor organizations in the
Netherlands. Truly we must not only appreciate the
readiness of prominent figures of these modem
movements [to embrace our cause], but must also
gain the attention and forbearance of their thousands
of followers as well. I stated my view that the Dutch
labor movements gave attention to conditions here
[in the Indies], because the conditions here affect
their own economic and political struggle against
their enemies, that is, capitalists and imperialists in
their own country and in the wider world. I stated my
belief that as the Dutch laborers’ understanding of
our movement’s origins becomes fuller, that they
would be more aware how this colonial land, ruled
by the Netherlands, is manipulated to generate ex¬
cessive advantages to a small number of Dutch capi¬
talists and bourgeois, that is, wealthy people and
those who hold important positions. At the same
time, Dutch laborers do not receive similar benefits,
but rather, they get just the opposite. Because this
colonial land exists, the wealthy and important of¬
ficeholders do not need to develop industry and
undertake land cultivation in their own country, as
should have been done. These two empowered
groups are content with investing capital in com¬
merce, shipping, land cultivation, and mining con¬
nected with this colonial land. At the same time, the
economic system of the Netherlands is not developed
by these two influential classes. Consequently, we
observe that Dutch laborers are no better off or bet¬
ter employed than other European laborers, such as
those in Sweden, Norway, and Denmark, which do
not have colonial lands. Also, there are a hundred
thousand poor people in the Netherlands, who live
in poverty and unemployment. The wealthy people
and holders of high office, who are laborers’ enemies
in economics and politics, have gained in strength.
While the Netherlands has maintained a democracy
for hundreds of years, ultimate power is held by the
reactionary conservatism of the wealthy and those
high officeholders.
This is more or less my viewpoint, as published in
the organ of the Dutch labor movement, which can be
freely examined, but is not necessary to argue further
[at this point]. Such a viewpoint will not quickly be
absorbed into the minds and thinking of Dutch labor¬
ers, who for more than 300 years have been deceived
by their own wealthy and officeholding countrymen.
On the other hand, this power elite feels that this situa¬
tion is “dangerous” and very threatening. They are well
aware that when the Dutch laborers open their eyes
to the real situation, they will change their course,
and with their own well-organized movements, will
campaign vigorously to oppose, deny, and ultimately
fight against the exploitation of this colonial land.
They will regard it as a violation of the Dutch labor
movement itself, one that has adversely affected its
fate.
It is not surprising that the voice of Dutch bour¬
geois here, the newspaper Soerabaiaas Handelsblad
[Soerabaia Commercial Gazette ], is startled and
behaves like a liar whose secrets have been exposed.
It states its denials, like a liar who cannot deny the
obvious, undeniable reality. Its fate is assured. It
knows that its first and principal duty is to the Neth¬
erlands Administration here, which inherited this
colonial land from a commercial association [the
Dutch East India Company]. [The Administration’s
task] is nothing else than to continue the profit-mak¬
ing of commercial ventures as expressed through the
policies of the kingdom of the Netherlands, which
continues its support of the interests of private
Dutch capital. With this viewpoint in mind, [the
newspaper] seeks to mislead [its readers] concern¬
ing our movement’s confrontation [with Dutch au¬
thorities], which is intended to defend our rights and
our life in our [. . .] motherland. [. . .]
“This is dangerous,” says the Soerabaiaas
Handelsblad. “Obviously, no native politician can be
called a ‘politician,’ since none of them has any other
purpose than expressing hatred against the Nether¬
lands.” As for Hadji A. Salim, it is further said [the
author is paraphrasing], it is difficult to fathom his
essential goals, and possibly he has a little higher
purpose than his politician cronies, but even he is no
different, wanting freedom from the Netherlands. In
addition, this haji —who uses the influence of his title
[indicating that he has made the pilgrimage to
Mecca]—is actually more dangerous, because his
political education is more advanced, and recently his
knowledge was sharpened by additional experience
gained during his journey in the Netherlands. He has
been able to connect himself with Dutch labor move¬
ments in the fields of mass organization and politics.
Therefore he now passes information to the Dutch
labor movements.
This is more or less the Soerabaiaas Handelsblad’ s
criticism as it was delivered. Indeed an honest per-
ASIAN DAWN 359
son will only be appreciated by other honest people.
A deceitful person will not be accomplished enough
to appreciate the honesty of other people. Accord¬
ingly we are not surprised when the Soerabaiaas
Handelsblad does not appreciate the honesty of our
movement’s direction. Freed from the Netherlands,
[Indonesians] will be a free people, governing them¬
selves in their own country!
There is one more question: "Does the Dutch
East Indies government, which currently is the agent
of the wealthy and the holders of important posi¬
tions, want to press its authority without even con¬
sidering the aspirations of Indonesians who belong
to this motherland?” Or is the Dutch East Indies
government a considerate government, exercising
its power in accordance with the spirit of the times,
that is, taking on the responsibility for preparing
these people to develop their own independent tal¬
ents, so that Indonesians can have their own inde¬
pendent country?
Only the base desires and vested interests of the
wealthy and entrenched elite would want the condi¬
tions outlined in the first question. Unfortunately,
during the present period, human integrity and the
[humanistic] assumptions accepted by all of the
world’s considerate nations are given little attention,
except by those who understand the second question.
It is a fact that Soerabaiaas Handelsblad is a rep¬
resentative of old-fashioned thinking. And so we
cool our souls and wait for a later era when our
attitude and cause will be proved to have been
correct. To the writer of Soerabaiaas Handelsblad
and the society it serves, we say, “Goodbye to your
conservatism!”
50
Ahmad Hassan
Question and Answer
Ahmad Hassan (Singapore-lndonesia, 1888-1958) was a teacher, polemicist, and uncom¬
promising modernist. He was of Tamil extraction, bom in Singapore, given a basic Islamic
instruction by his father, and thereafter largely self-taught. He was involved in cloth mer¬
chandising and newspaper work at Singapore, then migrated in his late thirties to Bandung
in Indonesia, where he became involved with a religious study group called the Persatuan
Islam (Islamic Union). He exercised a leadership role in this group, calling for fervent
opposition to secular nationalism, traditionalist Islam, Christian missionary work, the
Ahmadiyya movement (a heterodox sect of Islam), and the Dutch colonial regime. Ahmad
Hassan held that Muslim traditionalism and the doctrine of unquestioning obedience to
the old masters of religious law had allowed stagnation to stifle Islamic dynamism, and
that this situation could be reversed only through open investigation of religious sources.
He wrote extensively, helping to create a new Islamic literature in the Indonesian lan¬
guage, including a commentary on the Qur'an, several works on Muslim belief and a lengthy
set of legal opinions that laid out the modernist position in Muslim practice. The works
selected for translation here lay out his basic thinking regarding the traditionalist-mod¬
ernist debate. Along with this, three legal opinions on the Friday sermon in Malay and
the position of Arabs in Indonesian society are given to provide examples of his thinking
and his use of Islamic sources. 1
Unquestioning Acceptance of
Religious Scholars
Question: Is it permitted for Muslims to put our trust
in the ‘ulama ’ [religious scholars] and to engage in
taqlid [imitation] of them?
Answer: These two questions are really the same—
that is, in religious matters, can we obey the ‘ulama ’
without support from either the Qur’an or the sunna
[divinely inspired precedent] of the Prophet? To an¬
swer this problem, we first need to understand the
meaning of several terms: ijtihad [rational interpreta¬
tion], ittiba' [critical acceptance], and taqlid, as well
as those who engage in these practices: mujtahid,
muttabi', and muqallid.
Ijtihad originally meant “exertion” or “effort,”
and it is defined by the classical scholars as a con¬
certed effort to discover a religious rule in the Qur’an
and sunna and apply it to issues that are difficult to
interpret, and are beyond the ordinary. Such answers
require them to find answers from the Qur’an or
hadith [narratives of the Prophet] by hard toil and
[complex] analogy. A person able to undertake such
open interpretation is called a mujtahid.
A mujtahid needs strong Arabic language skills
in order to clearly understand the principles [he is to
undercover], as well as knowing the language in
general, even though he does not need to be an Arab
himself. Ijtihad is certainly needed in temporal mat¬
ters, particularly when new problems arise and the
Qur’an and the sunna do not explicitly lay down the
applicable rule. In such a case, the appropriate judge
or leader of Muslim society should undertake inves¬
tigation and comparison in the existing law with sub-
Ahmad Hassan, Soal-Djawab (Question and Answer )
(Bandung, Indonesia: Diponegoro, 1968-1969), pp. 388—
391, 203-205, 463^165, 383-384, 581. First published in
1931-1934. Translation from Indonesian by Akhmad
Minhadji. Introduction by Howard M. Federspiel.
1. G. F. Pijper, Studien over de geschiedenis van de Islam
in Indonesia 1900-1950 (Studies on the History of Islam in
Indonesia, 1900-1950) (Leiden, Netherlands: E. J. Brill,
1977), pp. 120-134; Howard M. Federspiel, The Persatuan
Islam: Islamic Reform in Twentieth Century Indonesia
(Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Modem Indonesia Project,
1971); Akhmad Minhadji. “Ahmad Hassan and Islamic Legal
Reform in Indonesia (1887-1958),” Ph.D. dissertation. McGill
University, 1995.
360
QUESTION AND ANSWER 361
stantiation from the Qur’an and hadith. An example
of this is found with the zakat [aim tax] levied on
certain crops. In the earlier Islamic era [that is, the
time of the Prophet Muhammad], Muslims paid the
zakat in grain, and this zakat was given to the needy,
used for the public service, or otherwise distributed.
But now, here [in Indonesia] there is no such grain,
but rather rice, so the zakat given to the needy and
otherwise used consists of that. In this case analogy
can be used. 2 Undertaking such investigation is
lauded in religious teaching; indeed, it is even com¬
manded for those who are qualified.
The basic meaning of ittiba \ as defined by most
‘ulama’, means accepting something based on the
commands, prohibitions, and behavior of the Prophet,
the behavior of his Companions, or discovery of com¬
mands, prohibitions, and behavior from one’s own
reading or from questioning religious scholars. [. ..]
The one who exercises ittiba ' is called a muttabi
Such people do not necessarily have to know Ara¬
bic, for they are only asked to understand the reli¬
gious reason for their daily religious practices, and
not to search exhaustively as the mujtahid does to
make analogies, give legal opinions, and the like. In
fact, there are only two ways to pursue a correct
understanding of religious teaching: ijtihad and
ittiba No other way is acceptable.
In the era of the Companions of the Prophet, only
a few people were mujtahids, while all the Com¬
panions were muttabi' s—but none of them were
muqallids, because if they were not familiar with the
law they asked the Prophet or the [other] Compan¬
ions concerning the matter. 3
Moreover, a muttabi' who receives two different
rules from two knowledgeable clerics on the same
matter has to check carefully which one of them is
stronger. It can happen, for instance, that one cleric
says that there is a hadith of the Prophet which al¬
lows us to recite the opening sura of the Qur’an be¬
hind the prayer leader during the Friday congrega¬
tional prayer, while another cleric states that a hadith
forbids this to be done. In such a case, the muttabi'
should carefully check each of the arguments to see
2. Analogy is the proper meaning here since hadith re¬
corded by both [Muhammad ibn Isma’il] Bukhari [810-870]
and Muslim [ibn al-Hajjaj, 821-875] say that “food” was
given out and the term was for “food” in general.
3. But they did not ask for a mere opinion on the matter
[but asked for the actual principle that applied].
which one has greater strength. The muttabi' cannot
say, “I cannot check which one of them is true be¬
cause I am not a cleric.” If that were true, anything
would be possible!
The problem faced by the muttabi' is similar to
that of counterfeit money. All people must make the
effort to find out whether or not their money is coun¬
terfeit; no one can say that I cannot do such check¬
ing because I am not a banker. [.. .]
Taqlid literally means imitating, and it is com¬
monly defined as imitating, copying, or accepting
certain rules without arguments of the Qur’an and
sunna of the Prophet. Someone who exercises taqlid
is called a muqallid. Such unquestioning acceptance
is forbidden by religion. God has decisively decreed
this in the Qur’an: “Do not follow that of which you
have no knowledge.’’(Sura 17, Verse 36) He also
says: “In case you are unaware, enquire of those who
are keepers of the oracles of God.” (Sura 16, Verse
43) Asking the scholars of the Qur’an means inquir¬
ing about the principles in the Qur’an, not their
speculation about the matter.
It is not only God who forbids this [unthinking]
approach, but the very classical scholars whose les¬
sons are accepted unquestioningly. Imam Hanafi
[Abu Hanifa, circa 699-767], for example, forbade
his fellow Muslims to engage in taqlid. His great
student, Abu Yusuf, also reminded his colleagues
of this danger. This was also true of [the other
founders of the major Sunni legal traditions,] Imam
Malik [ibn Anas, 710-796], Imam [Abu ‘Abdullah
Muhammad] al-Shafi‘i 1767-820], and most par¬
ticularly Imam [Ahmad ibn] Hanbal [780-855], who
said: “Do not engage in taqlid. Do not take my con¬
cepts, or Malik's concepts, or Shafi'i’s concepts, but
take and acknowledge the sources from which we
draw our religious arguments.”
For us, the attitude of the traditionalist Muslims
who always practice taqlid is unreasonable, for they
claim that they practice taqlid toward their religious
teachers, while the religious teachers themselves,
basing themselves on the Qur’an and His Prophet,
clearly forbid such thinking. Do people who do not
base their findings on the Qur’an and the Prophet,
and also do not follow the findings of their earlier
scholars, which are based on the Qur'an and the
Prophet, have the rights to claim them as their reli¬
gious leaders?
Moreover, people here [in Indonesia] assert that
they are followers of the Shafi‘i religious school, but
362 Ahmad Hassan
they fail to present even a single argument of Shafi’i
which supports the practice of taqlid. The religious
teachers have always stated that to understand the
Qur’an and hadith is difficult and requires learning
that not everybody has. Consequently, they claim that
it is enough for people of our time to follow what has
already been said by our religious scholars, who take
their concepts from the great and famous religious
scholars of the early centuries of Islam. But against
this clarification it can be stated that Muslims who
can engage in ijtihad should do so, if necessary; and
the rest should employ ittiba As for taqlid, it sim¬
ply is not permitted.
The Language of the Friday Sermon
Question: Is there any religious argument that allows
us to use a language other than Arabic during the
Friday sermon?
Answer: There are quite a number of Qur’anic
verses which encourage us to continually think and
seek to understand our surroundings, to be smart and
knowledgeable, and, at the same time, to condemn
those who do the opposite. Also, there are also many
hadith which promote the importance of reason and
denounce foolishness.
It is said in the Qur’an; “Do they not ponder on
what the Qur’an says? Or have their hearts been
sealed with locks?” (Sura 47, Verse 24) “We have
sent down a Book to you which is blessed, so that
people may apply their minds to its revelations, and
people of wisdom may reflect.” (Sura 38, Verse 29)
These two verses indicate clearly that the Qur’an is
not to be recited without thinking about it and prop¬
erly understanding its contents.
The same case can be made with the Friday ser¬
mon. If the Qur’an condemns those who read the
Qur’an without understanding, is it possible to say
that those who read and listen to the sermon without
understanding its content will be included among
those whom God respects? It is true that the Prophet
delivered his sermons in Arabic; but he was an Arab
who delivered his sermons in an Arab land, and those
who listened to him were all Arabs. But this does not
mean that the sermon cannot be delivered in another
language. Those who can discern will understand that
we are commanded to hear the sermon, not the Arab
language, which, after all is a human construction.
not the method of delivery used by the sermon giver.
It is more significant that most, if not all, sermon
givers do not even understand the content of their
sermons, [since they were written by others and
merely recited by the sermon givers].
Is it not then foolish and unreasonable to say that
our religion teaches us to deliver the sermon in Ara¬
bic before audiences that do not understand Arabic?
If it were the case that on Friday it is necessary [from
a religious perspective] to listen to Arabic recitation,
clearly it would be better to simply listen to a recita¬
tion of the Qur’an. The main goal of the sermon is to
give religious advice, reflection, and teaching, and
no advice or reflection is possible if the hearer does
not understand.
There is not a single mention in the Qur’an or the
sunna that requires the sermon to use the Arabic lan¬
guage, nor is there any mention that a sermon can¬
not be delivered in a language used by the hearers of
the sermon. If this were the case, then it would be
necessary for all Muslims to know Arabic, and there
is no mention of this either.
If some people strenuously insist that the sermon
must be given in Arabic because the Prophet deliv¬
ered his sermons in Arabic, then these people must
also strongly insist that the marriage ceremony can¬
not be given in any language but Arabic, because the
Prophet was married and married others using Ara¬
bic. Likewise they must equally say that any advice
cannot be given in a language other than Arabic,
because the Prophet always did so using Arabic.
[I am aware that if the sermon can be delivered in
a language other than Arabic,] someone will then say
that the same idea applies to the practice of our daily
prayers, that is, that they can be translated as well. To
this we firmly answer that the sermon must be differ¬
entiated from prayer. The purpose of a sermon is ad¬
vice and reflection, and sermons are not always the
same, because they vary according to time, place and
necessity. Accordingly, such advice must be structured
in a language understandable to the listeners, because,
if it was composed in the Arabic language, listeners
who did not understand Arabic would certainly not
understand the advice. As to the texts read during the
daily prayers, they were permanently established by
the Prophet and do not ever change. [...]
Muslims should be aware that religious teachings
are divided into two parts: that is. matters of worship
and matters of general behavior. Anything included
QUESTION AND ANSWER 363
in worship must be undertaken according to the ex¬
amples of the Prophet. This includes the prayers, [. ..]
which must be recited in Arabic as the Prophet did
during his lifetime. The recitations of the Prophet
during prayer were always the same from one time
to the next, and from one place to another; conse¬
quently the texts are permanent.
In the case of matters which did not involve pre¬
scribed worship, that is, matters relating to general
practice, such as giving advice and personal prayers,
the Prophet did not always do things in the same way,
as he did in matters of prescribed worship. Conse¬
quently we are free to do that as well, and we are free
to use any appropriate language in that effort.
It stands to reason that if advice and personal
prayer must be given in Arabic, the conclusion is that
all Muslims cannot use any language other than Ara¬
bic. This is surely not true. [Further,] if it is believed
that the sermon is required as prescribed worship,
then the substance of the sermon could not ever be
changed, but must be recited following the Prophet’s
recitation, as exists in the case of formal prayer. But,
if the view is taken that the matter involves practice,
rather than prescribed worship, then there is no im¬
pediment or prohibition for the sermon to be in a
language other than Arabic. Actually, the only pur¬
pose of the sermon is for advice.
Some traditionalist religious scholars contend that
the sermon may not be given in any language but
Arabic. The listeners either understand or not, the
sermon giver either understands or not. [According
to this view,] the sermon must be given in Arabic
because the Prophet gave his sermons in Arabic. . . .
[ellipses in original] 4
Actually, we would ask such religious scholars
why they always give advice [outside of prescribed
prayer] in languages other than Arabic, since the
Prophet never once did so. If it were possible and an
Islamic state came into existence, obviously it would
be right and proper that all people would be required
to speak Arabic, so that all the Muslim peoples of the
world would do so, and communication between
4. When these traditionalist religious scholars agree with
the actions and words of the Prophet, they go directly to the
hadith as the source of this agreement. But if they disagree,
then they go to their earlier scholars, on the basis that they
themselves are not “original" scholars and may not use hadith
directly. This is certainly a satisfying way of doing things.
[The author is being ironic.—Ed.]
different groups would be facilitated. But at this time
here [in Indonesia], if a person teaches only in Ara¬
bic, he will not succeed.
Boasting about Heredity and
Tribal Importance
Question: According to Islamic law, what is the po¬
sition of those who exhibit pride in or even boast
about having descent from the Prophet, having a
royal title, being an Arab, and so on? 5
Answer: God has already ruled in the Qur’an:
“Whichever of you has the most integrity has indeed
greater honor with God.” (Sura 49, Verse 13) And
the Prophet, peace be upon him, has also said: “There
is no difference between Arab and non-Arab, the best
among them are those who are closer to God.”
Based on the verse and the hadith, we can con¬
clude that all human beings are the same. Their sta¬
tus is based on their own positive effort during their
life, according to the rules of Islamic law. In another
verse of the Qur’an, God has also clearly indicated,
“The faithful are surely brothers.” (Sura 49, Verse 10)
If there are those who are proud of being the fam¬
ily of the prophets, let them know that all of us spring
from one tree, the prophet Adam. Further, if there are
those who are proud of being an Arab, tell them that
they are also a descendant of Jews, who come from
the same roots. In addition, if someone is proud of
being the descendant of royalty, we should say that
royalty are also human beings like us. They became
kings because they gained control, or even seized
control, from earlier kings, always helped and sup¬
ported by monarchists.
Moreover, our religion teaches us not to boast or
demand that others respect us without good reason;
but rather to work hard for the prosperity of society
based on the rules laid down by God, whereby oth¬
ers will respect us. Consequently, we should not
boast as being the descendant of this or that, an atti¬
tude condemned by religious teaching. There is an
Arabic expression: “A branch not bearing fruit is cut
down for firewood, even though it comes from a tree
that bears fruit.”
5. [At the time, Arabs in Southeast Asia, particularly
descendants of the Prophet, were considered of higher social
status than Indonesians.—Trans.]
364 Ahmad Hassan
Marrying a Woman Who Is a Descendant
of the Prophet
Question: Almost every day we read in the news¬
papers the problem of those descended from the
Prophet. The question is this: Why can’t a woman
descended from the Prophet marry outside her own
family? According to Islamic law, what is the rule
for those who have such an idea?
Answer: The main sources of Islamic law, the
Qur’an and the sunna of the Prophet, do not forbid
or hinder, but rather allow a Muslim woman to marry
any Muslim man from any ethnic group or nation.
Those who forbid a certain marriage because of the
different family background belong to the group
which forbids something which was originally al¬
lowed by God. We can make allowances for those
who do not know Islamic law, but for those who
have such knowledge and still follow that concept,
we should ask them: According to Islamic law, what
is the rule for those who forbid something allowed
by God?
51
Muhammad Hasyim Asy’ari
Some Advice
Kyai Haji Muhammad Hasyim Asy'ari (|ava, 1871-1947) is widely regarded in Indonesia
as one of the most respected religious leaders of the twentieth century. Educated in his
father's school in Java, with further studies at Mecca, he founded and taught at several
pesantren (seminaries) in East Java and was a primary organizer of the Nahdlatul Ulama
(Renaissance of the Religious Scholars) association in 1926, leading that organization until
his death in 1945. He was active in nationalist politics, usually calling for greater unity
among Muslims in the independence movement. Asy’ari was a transitional figure between
traditionalism and modernism in Muslim religious thought. He held tightly to the impor¬
tance of the traditional Muslim schools of law, stating that they held the vital truth about
Islamic doctrine. At the same time, he left room for new interpretation by scholars who
were appropriately trained and who stayed within traditional bounds. He introduced new
teaching methods in his schools and encouraged his son and his favorite students to under¬
take further experimentation in subject matter and styles of teaching. He attempted to
seek reconciliation with modernists, but was usually rebuffed by them; at the same time
he apparently convinced many in the Muslim community at large of his sincerity, The
selection chosen for translation, a 1935 speech delivered to the Nahdlatul Ulama orga¬
nization Asy'ari helped to found, appeals for harmony between traditionalists and mod¬
ernists, Asy'ari describes the Islamic community as all-inclusive and tolerant, though his
opponents did not view him or his efforts as achieving these goals. 1
In the name of God, the beneficent, the merciful.
From the lowest and the most contemptible ser¬
vant of God, namely Muhammad Hasyim Asy’ari.
May God forgive him, his parents, and the entire
umtna [Muslim community]. Amen.
To my respected Muslim brothers, ‘ulama ’ [reli¬
gious scholars], and ordinary people. Peace, God’s
mercy and blessing be upon all of you.
The news has reached me that among you there
is rage, slander, and conflict at present. I know the
reasons for this condition. Surely this happens be¬
cause they have changed and replaced God’s book,
the Qur’an, and the hadith [sayings] and surma [prac-
Kyai Haji Muhammad Hasyim Asy’ari, “Beberapa Nasehat
Kyai Haji Muhammad Hasyim Asy’ari” (Some Advice of
Shaykh Hasyim Asy’ari), in Pesan-Pesan Dua Pemimpin
Besar Islam Indonesia (The Messages of Two Great Lead¬
ers of Indonesian Islam), edited by Abdul Munir Malkan
(Yogyakarta, Indonesia: Medio, 1986), pp. 16-20. Text of
a speech delivered in 1935. Translation from Indonesian by
Lathiful Khuluq. Introduction by Howard M. Federspiel.
1. Harry J. Benda, The Crescent and the Rising Sun (The
Hague, Netherlands: Van Hoeve, 1958), pp. 151 and forward;
Aboebakar Atjeh, Sejarah Hidup K.H.A. Wahid Hasjim dan
tice] of the Prophet, even though God, the most mer¬
ciful, has stated; “The faithful are surely brothers, so
restore friendship among your brothers.” [Qur'an,
Sura 49, Verse 10]
Nowadays, some members of the umma regard
their Muslim brothers as enemies and do not want to
improve brotherhood, but rather to destroy it. The
prophet has stated: “You should not be jealous of
others; you should not divide people; you should not
quarrel; all of you should be God’s servants who are
close to one another.” [Unfortunately,] people nowa¬
days are envious, angry, divided, quarrelsome, and
hostile to each other.
O, you ‘ulama’ who have fanatically supported
narrow opinions! Abandon your fanaticism concem-
Karangan Tersiar (Biography of K.H.A. Wahid Hasjim and His
Various Writings) (Jakarta, Indonesia: Kementerian Agama.
1957); Lathiful Khuluq, “K.H. Hasyim Asy’ari’s Contribution
to Indonesian Independence," Studia Islamika, volume 5. num¬
ber 1, 1998. pp. 46-67; Lathiful Khuluq. Ajar Kebangunan
Ulama: Biographi K.H. Hasyim Asy'ari (Training Religious
Scholars: Biography of K.H. Hasyim Asy’ari ) (Yogyakarta,
Indonesia: LkiS, 2000).
365
366 Muhammad Hasyim Asy’ari
ing contentious matters, since even the greatest schol¬
ars held more than one opinion about them. One
stated that every ijtihad [rational, in this case schol¬
arly, interpretation] is correct, while the other men¬
tioned that even though only one interpretation can
be correct, those who engage in such interpretation
can still be rewarded, even though the end product
of thinking is incorrect.
I ask my brothers to leave behind their clique men¬
tality and abandon passions that are destructive. Fight
for Islam by giving all your strength, and overcome
them who slander the Qur’an and the attributes of God.
Fight against those who teach harmful knowledge and
who harm faith. Indeed, it is an obligation [for Mus¬
lims] to fight against those people. So, let us, broth¬
ers, sacrifice ourselves to meet these obligations.
O, all believers!
Before you stand infidels who deny God. They fill
every corner of the country. Who [among you] is
ready to engage in dialogue with them and guide
them to the right path?
O, ‘ulama'\
Your discipline is the application of religious
thought, and in that effort there are those who are
stubborn.
Brothers, indeed your obstinacy in religious
knowledge and the quarreling among you to gain a
particular view are not appreciated by God, the most
high! And such obstinacy and quarreling are also
not appreciated by the Prophet, peace be upon him.
If you [follow such a path, indeed] your real moti¬
vation is fanaticism, conflict, and hatred for one
another.
If Imam [Abu ‘Abdullah Muhammad] ShafTi
[767-820], Imam Abu Hanifa [circa 699-767], Imam
Malik [ibn Anas, 710-796], Imam Ahmad [ibn
Hanbal, 780-855], [Abu’l-‘Abbas] Ibn Hajar [al-
Haytami, 1504—1567], and [Muhammad ibn Ahmad]
Ramli [circa 1511-1595] were still alive, they would
certainly condemn your behavior and distance them¬
selves from you and from your behavior. All of you
surely see the great number of ordinary people—only
God the greatest knows their number—who do not
perform prayer five times a day, whereas according
to Imam Shafi'i, Imam Malik, and Imam Ahmad they
will be punished [in the Hereafter for that failure] by
having their throats cut. You certainly cannot deny
this, for certainly you yourself see your neighbor who
does not perform prayers, and there are even those
in our own group who, more and more, neglect their
prayers and put them aside.
Then, what is the significance and the need of
quarreling about trivial religious matters which are
also disputed by the experts of Islamic jurisprudence?
On the contrary, you do not differ concerning some
specific matters which are certainly forbidden by all
scholars, such as fornication, usury, drinking alco¬
hol, and the like. There should be no argument here,
except between Imam Shafi'i and Shaykh Ibn Hajar
[on minor points of interpretation]. Such arguing only
creates division in the unity of faith and destroys your
brotherhood. It gives the ignorant power over you.
It diminishes your authority in the eyes of the people,
especially those of poor character. These foolish
people will humiliate your honor by saying impolite
and improper things about you.
These people have suffered ruin because of you
‘ulama’. And you yourselves have suffered great
harm because of your own great sin [of quarreling
with one another],
O, ‘ ulama ’!
If you see people doing good deeds based on the
opinions of the great teachers of the past, or accept¬
ing their word as truth without examining original
sources, even if the teacher’s opinion is not really
correct, then, even if you do not agree, do not insult
such people, but guide them in a nice way! Certainly
those who [insult others with such condemnation]
violate God’s commands and commit great sin.
Those who do that destroy the integrity of a nation
and close every door to [communal] well-being.
Further, God forbids His believing servants to be
hostile toward one another. Rather, give others ad¬
vice on the ill effects of improper thought and behav¬
ior, that is, how certain actions will lead to sad events
and bad consequences. God stated: “And do not ever
be hostile to one another because hostility will cause
brittleness, and cause your authority to disappear.” 2
O, Muslims!
Indeed, current events can be used as an instruc¬
tional device; and the lessons drawn from this source
are far from insignificant. Wise people are able to make
use of and take advantage of such everyday experi¬
ences and events, even more than the preaching of
2. [This may be a paraphrase of the Qur'an. Sura 3, Verse
103, or Sura 8, Verse 46.—Trans.]
SOME ADVICE 367
some sermon givers and the advice of those [legalists]
proffering it. Take events to heart that occur before our
eyes each and every day. Do we not regret [certain]
actions? Are we not be aware of drunkenness [in our
midst]? Don’t we make mistakes? And are we also
aware of [instances of] our own success, based on
helping one another and unity? These positive cases
exist because of clean hearts and pure intentions. Or
will we continue to be divided, to be hypocrites: out¬
wardly pleasant, inwardly hostile, hearts full of hatred
and legacies of deep resentment.
Indeed, our religion is one: Islam! Our legal alle¬
giance is one: the Shafi‘i [school of Islamic legal
scholarship]! Our region is one: Java! 3 And we are
all Sunnis.
So I swear by God, in truth, that your feeling of
hateful dissension is woefully apparent, and that this
constitutes a great danger to our progress.
O, Muslims!
Fear God and return to the book of God, behave
according to the way of the Prophet, and establish
good models of conduct in order that you be suc¬
cessful, even as the early Muslims before us were
successful. Fear God and help each other in matters
of goodness and piety. Do not abet others in sin and
abomination. God will reward you in His mercy and
grace. And do not be like people who say, “We have
heard,” but actually are not listening.
May good will be with us from the beginning to
the end [of this congress].
3. [Religious scholars of Asy’ari’s generation used
“Java” to refer to all of Indonesia, following the practice of
the Arabs.—Trans.]
52
Ya‘qub Wang Jingzhai
Imperatives for Encouraging
Islamic Culture
Ya'qub Wang jingzhai (China, 1879-1949) is known as one of the "Four Great Akhond s"
(religious scholars) of modern China, A journalist, translator, and religious scholar, Wang
made significant contributions to the modernization and rejuvenation of Chinese Islam.
The son of a Hui (Chinese Muslim) imam (prayer leader) in the city of Tianjin, in eastern
China, Wang received early training in Arabic and Persian, as well as the Confucian clas¬
sics. At the age of twenty-six he began his own career as imam, serving in several Muslim
communities in eastern China and Taiwan. He became increasingly involved in Chinese
Islamic revivalist movements, and focused on reforming Islamic education in China. Wang
was also an advocate of intensifying relations between China’s Muslims and the rest of
the Muslim world. He participated in the first modem wave of Chinese Muslim students
to seek advanced education in the Middle East, studying at al-Azhar in the 1920s, and
helped other Chinese to follow him. Upon his return, he established several journals
dedicated to Chinese Islamic issues and translated the Qur'an, the first complete trans¬
lation into Chinese, carried out during the 1930s under the sponsorship of a Chinese
Muslim warlord. Wang also compiled several Arabic-Chinese dictionaries, Islamic man¬
uals, and guidebooks in Chinese, and wrote a commentary on the Qur’an. In the article
translated here, Wang promotes the compatibility of pan-lslamic identity with Hui na¬
tionalism, and Hui nationalism with Chinese nationalism, which was both spurred and
threatened in the 1930s by Japanese invasions. 1
The Chinese Hui [Muslim] Patriotic Committee has
just issued a pronouncement: The Supreme Council
on National Defense considers that China’s and
India’s Islamic cultures are a main component of
Eastern culture, and China’s Muslims number nearly
40 million, second in the world. 2 In consideration of
this fact, and the exigencies of the War of Resistance
against Japan, and the fit between Islamic culture
Ya'qub Wang Jingzhai, “Fazhan Yisilan wenhua zhi biyao”
(Imperatives for Encouraging Islamic Culture), in Li Xinghua
and Feng Jinyuan, editors, Zhongguo Yisilan jiao shi cankao
ziliao xuanbian, 1911-1949 (Anthology of Reference Mate¬
rials on the History of Chinese Islam, 1911-1949) (Ningxia,
China: Ningxia renmin chubanshe, 1985), volume 2, pp. 920-
928. Text of a speech first published in 1939. Translation
from Chinese by Howard L. Goodman. Introduction by Zvi
A. Ben-Dor.
1. Ibrahim Ma Zhao-chun, “Islam in China: The Inter¬
nal Dimension,” Journal [of the] Institute of Muslim Minor¬
ity Affairs , volume 7, number 2, 1986, pp. 373-383; Ma
Shou-qian, “The Hui People’s New Awakening from the End
of the 19th Century to the Beginning of the 20th Century,”
[and Chinese culture], the need for urgent contact
between Chinese and Islamic cultures is self-evident.
The Islamic religion’s texts are mostly written in
Arabic, and in the Near East the languages of the
small ethnic groups are also basically Arabic. To
make contact between China and Arabic cultures, as
well as promote plans for cooperation among minor¬
ity peoples in the East [that is, in China], research
on the Arabic language must be deemed essential.
in The Legacy of Islam in China (Cambridge, Mass.: Fairbank
Center for East Asian Research, Harvard University, 1989),
pp. 111-137; Qiu Shusen et alia, editors, Zhongguo Huizu
da cidian (Great Dictionary of the Chinese Hui Nation )
(Nanjing, China: Jiangsu guji chubanshe, 1992), pp. 962-
963; Yang Keli et alia, editors, Zhongguo Yisilan baikequan
shu (Chinese Encyclopedia of Islam) (Chengdu. China:
Sichuan cishu chubanshe. 1994. pp. 580-581; Franijoise
Aubin, “Les traductions du Coran en chinois” (Translations
of the Qur’an into Chinese), Etudes orientates (Oriental Stud¬
ies), numbers 13-14, 1994. pp. 1-17.
2. [Reliable statistics are unavailable, but this estimate
is most likely an exaggeration.—Ed.]
368
IMPERATIVES FOR ISLAMIC CULTURE 369
Consequently, an order has been given to the Pro¬
vincial Administration to issue instructions to the
Education Department to appoint two lecturers to
initiate courses at the National University, one in
Arabic and one in Islamic culture. The Education
Department has also designated new positions at
National Central University, Northeast Union Uni¬
versity and Yunnan University. At present the search
for teaching talent is taking place, and since the time
frame is short, we must plan to address current reali¬
ties. [The author’s paraphrase of the pronouncement
ends here.]
When this news was handed down, we who heard
it were elated. Those of us who have hoped against
hope [for such a policy] could now see it becoming
reality. It is a step forward for the unity of minority
peoples during this time of the Resistance. However,
this is no more than a first step. As a result, from this
day forward we will deepen the development of Is¬
lamic culture, and so we must create specialized
Arabic universities. When I traveled in India, places
such as Lahore, Lucknow, and Delhi had plans for a
comprehensive university specializing in Arabic
studies that would surpass Egypt’s al-Azhar Univer¬
sity in all respects. According to conversations with
my Indian coreligionists, the northwest corner of
India had several universities specializing in Arabic
studies, all established by the English government,
with considerable annual budgets paid by the English
government. Our compatriots felt completely in¬
debted to the English, who in this case exhibited
virtuousness for their ardent improvement of the level
of Arabic culture in India. In retrospect, everywhere
that the English created Arabic studies universities,
talent grew ever greater, to the point that they were
keeping pace with students at Egypt’s al-Azhar Uni¬
versity. In the past several decades, Indian scholars
of Arabic have edited more than 10,000 Arabic texts,
which have found a strong market in the Muslim
areas of the northwest Chinese provinces of Gansu,
Ningxia, and Qinghai. Persian studies would be in¬
cluded in our proposed Arabic studies university, so
that Persian publications from India would also find
a market in China, and so on.
England’s ambitions are considerable when it
comes to its stance toward its colonies, as well they
should be—in this case, India’s encouragement of
Islamic culture. Our own Chinese government also
should pay attention to encouraging and expanding
native Islamic culture.
Japan, basically a Buddhist nation, has never had
any Muslims, and Islamic culture has never had the
opportunity to develop in that country. Yet in the past
several years Japan has followed in the footsteps of
England and sought to use Islamic culture as a tool
of government. On one hand they have constructed
a Muslim mosque in Tokyo and printed a translation
of the Qur’an; on the other hand they have groups of
students at Egypt’s al-Azhar University diligently
studying Arabic and investigating Muslim culture.
We can guess that their intent is to implement their
doctrine of Greater Asia, 3 and after that to control all
of Asia’s Muslims while completely manipulating
Islamic culture. This Japanese plan is surely a delu¬
sion, and our own government ought to think of an
appropriate countermeasure. The decision of our
Supreme Council on National Defense to set up two
courses in Arabic and Islamic cultural studies in the
three national universities is, in effect, a tacit and
suitable counterbalance to this outlandishly bizarre
tactic of the Japanese. In addition, in view of these
unusual times, ethnic peoples [in China] should in¬
tensify their good-faith unity, practice frugality, and
end idle pleasures, so that each of these peoples may
develop a coherent stance toward the outside world.
The most important points for anyone involved in
Islamic culture are to increase unity and resist out¬
side oppression; they should talk of faith, listen to
their consciences, and be diligent and hardworking;
they should not enter into useless and wasteful mat¬
ters; they must discard superstition and stick to rea¬
son. In this way, in this time of the War of Resistance,
we shall promote Islamic culture and respond appro¬
priately [to the war], both internally and externally.
While tending carefully to the advance of Chinese
Muslim culture, I am striving as well to introduce the
history of Chinese Muslim culture to the reading
public, and am especially keen on supporting the
addition of the two courses in Arabic studies and
Islamic culture.
The Evolution of Chinese Islamic Culture
The culture of Islam dates back more than a thousand
years, and gradually developed into the glorious
3. [In the 1930s, Japan developed a strategy of Asian
domination called the "Great East Asia Co-Prosperity
Sphere.”—Trans.]
370 Ya'qub Wang Jingzhai
manifestation that we see today. The first steps in
investigating this cultural progress were due to the
exertions of Western [that is. Middle Eastern] schol¬
ars. For a long time, we Eastern peoples merely in¬
herited their achievements, rather than develop them
spontaneously. The first writings to come to China
were for the most part Persian, with Arabic second-
most. When we examine just who it was that carried
Islam into our country, [we see that] the first were
Persian merchants, and a number of years after them
pilgrims to Mecca carried back with them Arabic
manuscripts from the West. Various individual
courses of study gradually became well established.
After the lifting of maritime isolationist policies and
the invention of printing, Arabic books from the West
proliferated like bamboo shoots after a spring rain.
An enormous amount was conveyed into China.
Quite a few came into the interior of China from
India and Egypt; those from Turkey were next in
number, and Mecca and Syria next after that. Subse¬
quently, when Chinese pilgrims visited Mecca, they
did not escape the hardships of traveling on foot, but
at least they did not have to double their chore by
loading up with books to take back. This one point
alone testifies to the difficulty China encountered
when it first promoted Islamic culture in the Far East
early on.
Although Arabic studies fall under the category
of Western literature, the way Chinese people read
Arabic is not the same as the way they read English,
French, German, Russian, and so forth. A [Chinese]
reader of English, French, and so on reads in the
original script, and can figure out the general mean¬
ing by recognizing particular words. Arabic is not
read in this way: reading is actually the recitation,
over and over, of a Chinese translation of the origi¬
nal. Not only does [the reader] understand it com¬
pletely, but those who do not read Arabic, on listen¬
ing to the recitation, are also able to get a full
understanding of its meaning. The first person to
translate Arabic into spoken Chinese, setting aside
the original text in order to go directly to the mean¬
ing, was the venerable teacher Xian Dahu of Xiaxi
[Elias Hu Dengzhou, circa 1522-1597]. This
gentleman’s skill in spoken and literary Chinese was
most refined. So as to accommodate native readers,
he created a deep linkage between the two languages.
It goes without saying that to meld together both
cultures, Arabic and Chinese, was an admirable feat.
In the Chinese literary world, this venerable man was
a talent of special note, and today’s students of Ara¬
bic still preserve his method. The Chinese transla¬
tions fully maintain the original language’s structure:
a word may be placed in front or at the end, but not
one word is discarded. The translated works flow
relatively easily in popular spoken language. People
call this the madrasa [seminary] 4 method.
Courses in Chinese Islamic Culture
To categorize the courses of study for Islamic cul¬
ture, we would have: vocabulary, first-level grammar,
advanced grammar, rhetoric, theology, law, Qur’anic
interpretation, and Persian. With the above as a for¬
mal curriculum, we would attempt to order a se¬
quence in the following way:
1. Vocabulary. Arabic vocabulary is essential.
Beginning with the study of spelling, Chinese read¬
ers of Arabic are barely able to recognize construc¬
tions. And to make further steps towards progress,
one must do so without instruction from teachers.
Western words are difficult, and Arabic ones even
more so. Thus I myself have said, “Even with ten
years of Arabic studies, you still cannot enter its true
depths.” The hardest part of learning Arabic is vo¬
cabulary. In the first place, the word roots are too
numerous; and second, the morphology of words is
complex. We estimate that there are about 400,000
roots. Each one undergoes numerous changes. For
example, such categories as verbs, adjectives, nouns,
and legal terms all have their own individual estab¬
lished usages with barely a hair’s difference among
them. But in addition to that, we have further distinc¬
tions of “characteristic”: singles, doubles, and plu¬
rals, which are different. There are only twenty-nine
letters, and at the very most it takes fifty minutes to
learn them well. It is simply that in the case of an
individual word, it is not like in Chinese, where the
meaning can be derived by resorting to the phonetic
[element of the written character]—this being the
point about the difficulty of [Arabic] study. Given
that Arabic is so difficult, that is why Chinese schol¬
ars stay bound to the well-practiced formulation [of
transmitting Arabic texts only in oral recitations]. But
it would be a mistake to believe that the difficulty of
4. [The author uses the term jingtang. denoting the tra¬
ditional Islamic school.—Trans.]
MPERATIVES FOR ISLAMIC CULTURE 371
learning Arabic is an obstacle to [the development
of] Hui [Islamic] culture.
2. First-level grammar. There are enough Arabic
grammar texts to "exhaust an ox and fill up a whole
house.” Our forebears in the world of Arabic studies
in China chose about five of these, that is, the Five
Books, among which there are differences in content.
They generally only discuss the overall features of
grammar, and so we call this the “first level.” It re¬
quires two years of work in a normal madrasa be¬
fore the five books are thoroughly digested. It goes
without saying, however, that talented and smart stu¬
dents must also have able instructors.
3. Advanced grammar. There are two books for this
generally in use in China: Dao wu luo mi su ba ha [The
Lamp , by Nasir ibn 'Abd al-Sayyid Mutarrizi, 1144—
1213] and Kafei jiejing [Commentary on Sufficient
(Lessons in Solving Grammatical Problems), by Jami,
1414—1492], The quickest it takes is three years in
order to master these two works. At that point one
could truly claim to write and speak. Yet, one would
only get the broad outline and feel inadequate as far
as the small details are concerned. At present, newly
published grammars are simple and suitable, but given
the Chinese preference for sticking with the old, they
are not disposed to choosing such texts. The grammar
texts to be selected at our three national universities
will be a major issue. The older texts are certainly
unsuitable, but the administrators of textbook acqui¬
sition, being circumspect and conscious of all details,
must continue setting a standard for the distant future.
4. Rhetoric. In China this means the study of
methods needed to relate any matter in a direct and
graceful way, as well as skill in debating. In compari¬
son with the study of Arabic vocabulary, the study
of rhetoric is quite difficult. Thus for a long time now,
one is as likely to find stars under the morning sun,
as to find a Chinese Arabicist who writes Arabic on
a par with those trained in the West. It is extremely
difficult to explain the rules of prosody in simple
terms, and this complex [system] is as old as Arabic
writing itself. With effort, it is possible to gain some
familiarity.
5. Theology. Islamic thought strives toward the
recognition that there is a Creator. As such, it is sci¬
entific, not mythological. This is the single point of
our theology. Scientists generally believe that what¬
ever is religious is in all ways superstitious and mytho¬
logical. In actuality, these two things are, simply, re¬
jected by our religion, because Islam preaches that
culture emphasizes the rational. One cannot speak [of
Islam] in the same breath as religious authorities who
bully an ignorant populace. Take for instance such
unverifiable [Chinese creation] stories like Pangu
separating heaven [and earth] and Nuwa transforming
minerals [into humans]. These stories are not in our
religion, and we [Hui] do not believe in them. Islamic
theology relied first on Holy Scripture (the Qur’an) and
wise remarks (the traditions of Muhammad), which
were then assisted by the reasoning of scholars. After
that, Greek philosophy assumed prominence, and
many sharp conflicts of logic arose vis-a-vis Islamic
theology. When Arab theologians translated Greek
philosophy into Arabic, they refuted the numerous
points, one by one, where the philosophy conflicted
with Islamic theology. Since then, Islamic theology
has become mingled throughout with appropriate theo¬
retics. Moreover, the rules of deduction and conclu¬
sion in formal logic are clearly those of a Creator.
This shows that Islam’s belief in the True Cre¬
ator—allusions to the Qur’an and the wise traditions
notwithstanding—utilizes modem scientific meth¬
ods. But more than this, physical aspects of things
in the universe also confirm that the theology of
Muslims is a complete science, and not superstition.
The new signs emerging in profusion today are iron¬
clad proof of our theological ideas. At present,
people’s desires carry them along with vapid fash¬
ions and decadent styles. We should employ Islamic
theology to rectify [such practices]. There is nothing
as wonderful as causing people to recognize the Cre¬
ator and in time to know that it is the fear [of God]
that binds their hearts.
6. Law. Most everyone knows that the whole of
law is divided into the studies of Roman law and
religious law. But few of our countrymen who prac¬
tice Islam are also trained in law. In law, the focus
worldwide is on civil law, criminal law, peacetime
international law, wartime international law, agricul¬
tural law, mercantile law, and so on. All of these are
covered in Islamic teaching, whose laws concerning
inheritance are most appropriate to our country’s
present reality. All one need say. today, in taking up
the matter of female inheritance, is that in ancient
China women lacked inheritance rights because
China's earliest institutions were based on clan-
lineage law. Each lineage had large and small
sublineages, and inheritance based on lineage status
became common practice. Despite being blood off¬
spring, women were denied inheritance rights. Law
372 Ya‘qub Wang Jingzhai
in Islamic teaching has no lineage-status inheritance
and gives women the right to inherit, but only one-
half of male inheritance. For example, person A has
one son and two daughters. His inherited property
would be dispersed half to the son and half to the two
daughters together. In China, only since the first and
ninth resolutions at the Kuomintang’s Second Na¬
tional Congress [in 1926] has there been any policy
for women’s inheritance rights. Nevertheless, the
principle of equal status between men and women has
been firmly decided and implemented. With regard
to the promotion [of gender equality], there is no
better example than in the areas of the northeastern
Hui, where disputes frequently arise that result in a
year’s worth of litigation. Last year our northeastern
coreligionists invited me to translate “Islamic Laws
of Female Inheritance” in order for those dealing with
such matters to have something to rely on. I acted on
their request, and after the draft was done I wanted
to send it to experts in the legal world to examine
carefully. This had not yet been realized when the
Sino-Japanese clash arose [in 1937].
7. Qur’anic exegesis. The most important course
of study in our madrasa is that of exegesis of Holy
Scripture, There is quite a lot of such exegesis, and the
one utilized in China is Gezhui zhu [Commentary on
Gezhui\. Someone edited it long ago into four large
volumes, and it was circulated for years. In recent
years, the madrasas emerging everywhere in the
northeast have followed the trend in circulating the
Housaini jiezhu [Exegesis of Husayni\. It is bound in
one large volume in the Western style and contains the
complete Persian commentary. Its predecessor, Gezhui
zhu, also received two large additional commentaries
explaining the Gezhui zhu, or exegeses of an exege¬
sis. Here we see how Islamic culture advances.
8. Persian. Muslim culture in China got its start
through importation by Persian traders, as already
noted above. Chinese students of Arabic view the
worth of Persian as on a par with Arabic, even though
it is a subdiscipline. Lately, proponents of the New
Learning have eliminated Persian courses, and this
has concentrated the efforts of students onto Arabic.
This way of seeing things certainly cannot be dis¬
missed summarily. However, since our forebears
built a whole course of study through great tribula¬
tion, my conscience could not bear the casual destruc¬
tion of it all. Therefore, I feel a great urge to support
Persian studies. The discipline of Persian studies in
China has generally used Shengui gezhi [Commen¬
taries on Hadith] (in two volumes); Huayuan lu [The
Rose Garden, by Sa’di, 1184—1292] (a well-known
book of ethics); the teachings of self-cultivation (for
example, the whole category of Guizhenyaodao [The
Path of God’s Bondsmen, by Najm al-Din Razi Daya,
1177-1256]); and Qur’anic commentary (for ex¬
ample, Zhaxidi [reference unclear]). Supposing that
Persian [studies] were to be eliminated, then this
curriculum would disappear into oblivion. We should
be very sorry for such a senseless abandonment.
Persia (today referred to as Iran) is one of the ancient
nations of the East. In the history of Eastern litera¬
ture, for example in philosophy, missing material
recorded in Chinese historical texts can be looked up
in old Persian documents. In light of this, we must
recognize that Persian has contributed to the devel¬
opment of Chinese culture, and we are obliged to
preserve it. Those who take an interest in Muslim
culture should not ignore this point.
With this eight-point curriculum, one might calcu¬
late that Persian and Arabic language studies would
involve a total of 13 texts. It would take 15 years to
graduate from a madrasa. Without this [curriculum],
[a student’s] learning would not be firmly grounded,
and it would be difficult to teach others. Leaving
aside the 13 course-books, there are also quite a few
supplemental works, the most well-known of which
is Mogematai [Muhammadanism, transliterated
from Russian] compiled by Mr. Haleirenyi [reference
unclear]. This is the one book for traditional Arabic.
In its fifteen chapters we have the quintessence of
Arabic literature, and in its profuseness it makes a
grand overview. Coming next, such areas as logic,
astronomy, ethics, and inheritance law were in
earlier times all set out in supplemental courses.
Today, though, they have become merely another
“Guangling san.” 5
Scholars of Traditional and Modem
Arabic Literature
In speaking generally of Chinese scholars of Ara¬
bic, the leading light since Master Hu [Dengzhou]
5. [“Guangling san” is the name of a lute tune played by
Xi Kang as he was led to his execution in 262 a.d. It is said
that he always refused to teach it, and the tune was no longer
known after his death.—Trans.]
IMPERATIVES FOR ISLAMIC CULTURE 373
was Liu Zhi of Nanjing (known as Jiekang gong
[1655-1745]), who wrote no fewer than seventy-
odd works. Those three volumes most to be com¬
mended, by scholars of our religion and by others,
are Tianfang dianli [Ritual and Ceremony of Islam],
Tianfang xingli [The Nature and Principle of
Islam], and Zhisheng shilu [The True Record of the
Most Wise], Aside from Master Jiekang, we should
mention Mr. Ma Fuchu of Yunnan [Ma Dexin, circa
1794-1874] as an eminence in Muslim culture. His
works include titles such as Daoxing jiujing [Com¬
pleting the Path of the Way], Sidian yaohui [Essen¬
tials of the Four Seasons], and Dahua zonggui [The
Great Change Ultimately Returns]. Next, we have
Zhenhui Laoren [the Old Master of Islam, Wang
Daiyu, circa 1584-1670], This master wrote Qing-
zhen daxue [The Great Learning of Islam], This list
contains older compilations, each with its own spe¬
cial features, all of which enjoyed broad appeal for
a long time. The confident style of writing, the thor¬
oughness of the reasoning—these are decidedly
things that the later generation of scholars cannot
even hope to match.
Of today’s scholars, one would have to place as
number one Yang Jingxiu of Tianjin (known as
Zhongming [1870-1952]). Mr. Yang has written such
titles as Sijiao yaokuo [The Essential Strictures of the
Four Teachings] and Zhong-A chuhun [A Learner’s
Book in Arabic] (an Arabic language text). This mas¬
ter has been a blessing for our studies in China, and
his essays are distinctly unique. At present he lives in
the former capital, without any contact, working on
Chinese translations from the Qur’an. Whenever these
get published, there is no telling what a blossoming
of splendor this will be for modem Islamic culture. Li
Yanxiang of Qian’an (known as Yuchen [1884-
1937]), who unfortunately passed away last year,
wrote, among other works. Da hua lishi [A Chronicle
of the Creation] and Shengyu lu [A Manual ofHadith],
which have become cherished reading for our col¬
leagues all over China. At present, the most well
known of the fresh new youth in China’s world of
Arabic studies include Ma Jian [1906-1978], a native
of Yunnan who has studied in Egypt, and Na Zijia, as
well as Hai Weiliang of Hunan. Ma has written such
Chinese works as Huijiao zhexue [The Theology of
Islam] and Huijiao zhenxiang [The Truth of Islam],
and also has translated the Analects of Confucius into
Arabic and published it in Egypt. Na has published a
translation titled Yisilan jiao [The Teachings of Islam],
Although Mr. Hai has not offered his colleagues a
monograph, his newspaper essays, which are found
everywhere outside of China, make us realize that his
aspirations are unusual, and such time as he returns to
China he will be a startling force. These scholars are
all men who are at home equally in Arabic and Chi¬
nese literature.
In the area of Persian specialists, we must place
as our founding father the early Qing era Master
Chang of lining [Chang Zhimei, 1610-1670], This
gentleman’s works include Posi wenfa [Persian
Grammar], which has remained popular throughout
the country to this day. All Chinese readers of Per¬
sian use the book as a key. One might say that Mas¬
ter Chang has been a harbinger of the true path.
In addition to the scholars mentioned above, Ma
Wanfu of Gansu (Old Hajj Ma of Guoyuan [1849-
1934]) certainly must be mentioned in the demoli¬
tion of the old writings that is going on in the mod¬
em era of Muslim culture. Though he was not
conversant in Chinese history and literature, he ex¬
erted great effort in the correction of old mistakes in
our religion and the development of a new Muslim
culture. The Shuaizhen [Righteous] Faction among
the akhonds [religious scholars] of the northwest
(their opponents being called the New Teaching) for
the most part got its start with the school of the Old
[Hajj]. Since its emergence, it has not distributed
among the populace any translations; yet its main
business thrives, and that achievement is enormous.
Arabic Students' Arduous Struggle to
Gain Knowledge
The structure of Muslim culture in the two provinces
of Gansu and Qinghai is flourishing: the quota of
students remains steady at approximately 100. Next
are the provinces of Ji, Lu, and Yu. It is a pity that
the numbers of students there do not amount to even
a quarter of those in the northwest. Yet if one con¬
siders their spirit of hard work and perseverance, they
rate a notch higher than students in the northwest. For
years, I personally observed the best students of the
old madrasas, and afterward I was director of instruc¬
tion for more than twenty years. The hardship that I
endured was too much even to recount. For some
years I ate crude meals and tasteless rice; my cloth¬
ing was a rough cotton shirt and trousers; I did my
own cooking and cleaning. I went over my lessons
374 Ya'qub Wang Jingzhai
in odd moments of spare time. I would finally get to
sleep only in the very small hours of the night. There
were no places and no money to buy the books
needed for higher study, and we could only copy
them out by hand on paper we made ourselves. The
paper was thick, made by using fine fur or flour that
had thickened. First we made a paste out of wheat
flour, and when the paper took shape, some white
wax was applied and the paper flattened with pol¬
ished rocks, making it harder and more durable than
today’s heaviest foreign paper. In writing we used
bamboo pens, which were shaped like today’s
metal-nib pens. When we finished writing, the stack
of paper was sometimes two inches thick. We used
wooden boards to press it together, then a sharp
knife to trim the edges, and finally nailed together
a binding by hand. It looked a bit like modern West¬
ern binding.
I have narrated these trivial matters here in order
to show just how difficult was the quest for learning
that our sort of madrasa student undertook. Also, I
have sought to commend the appropriate place that
the Chinese students of Arabic of old held among
their professional peers, and moreover the very mi¬
nor model [of ingenuity] that they supplied in the
context of new technologies. It is regrettable that out¬
siders knowing anything of this are rare indeed, and
if we look for the reason, we must find it in the fact
that there is no communication between Chinese and
Arabic cultures. We may attribute this lack of thor¬
ough communication to the fact that scholars on both
sides have not linked hands. When our thoughts and
recollections touch on these issues, how great a pity
it all seems. However, readers of Arabic benefit
greatly, if invisibly, from their study of Chinese.
Those schools that we call specialist Arabic text-
schools must by their nature be referred to as Chi-
nese-Arabic schools. This is simply because in so
many places, those who have never learned to read
Chinese characters usually recite in Chinese as they
read Arabic. There is no greater example of a small
fault that one may find in something otherwise fine—
and that comes as a delight, too.
Conclusion
For Chinese Muslims personally, the culture of Islam
has provided a basis for rugged and independent
survival. It would seem that we have no need for
contact with the outside [Chinese society], and also
that the outside world has no need of adding Arabic
and Muslim cultural studies to the process of broad¬
ening and developing their own individual school
programs. Be that as it may, a cool-headed look re¬
veals that the national universities face several urgent
practical necessities:
1. Because appointments of Arabic specialists are
higher paying than those for learned leaders in Is¬
lamic culture, the national universities’ interest in
excellent youthful lecturers would bring about the
needed speed [in promoting Arabic studies], and also
would be decidedly practical.
2. Quite frankly, Islam is a social force that seeks
peaceful ends through martial vigilance: in various
matters it talks peace and presents an exterior of pro¬
found ceremoniousness. But once it encounters outside
oppression, then it forms a mass resistance without a
moment’s thought. In Mecca some years ago, there was
a large convention of pilgrims, whose numbers ex¬
ceeded 200,000. In a swirl of quick-step motion they
arrived at the starting point outside the city, and in stick
shacks and frosty lodgings the world’s Muslims none¬
theless generated a solemn and orderly event. Other
religions do not have such well-precedented social
movements. One finds numerous rituals of this type in
Islam, and this suffices as an explanation. Returning
to the present, to add Islamic cultural studies courses
in response to a general clamor will, in effect, be of
some help in the current War of Resistance.
3. In all ways, the teachings of Islamic culture ad¬
vance innate knowledge, preserve society, and sta¬
bilize the nation’s educational profession. The
Qur’an teaches us, “If you change your mind, then
there must be a change in the Lord’s relation to you.”
[This appears to be a paraphrase of Sura 13, Verse
11.] This is a famous passage that calls for men to
correct their thinking, and not just change [to meet
the situation]. Elsewhere it says, “You will not breed
hatred in any place: the Lord does not take joy in
hatred between men." [Sura 5, Verse 64] This serves
to warn men not to destroy the social order. Else¬
where it says, “Obey .. . those in authority among
you” [Sura 4, Verse 59]—here meaning submitting
to the head of the nation. This phrase standing alone
is very terse. For example, in today’s case, when our
state leaders authorize a national decree, we have the
duty to uphold it without faltering. When people’s
minds are restless, the social order needs to be more
strongly preserved, and the patriotic emotions of the
IMPERATIVES FOR ISLAMIC CULTURE 375
populace must be elevated. Adding Islamic culture
[to the university curriculum] is a fitting response,
and will supply no small aid to people’s minds, to
society, and to the nation.
4. Islamic law is well suited to matters concern¬
ing human emotion, not just matters of wrongdoing.
Its greatest worth to society can be seen in the fric¬
tion between the poor and wealthy classes. For ex¬
ample, if a person’s yearly income yields 29 Chinese
yuan in surplus, there might be 5 mao for the pur¬
pose of charity. The annual practice of individual
donation at the end of Ramadan (about 2 mao each)
is considered an entitlement for the poor. It is a good
method for reconciling the poor and wealthy
classes.... If we contemplate China’s current situ¬
ation, then by simply imitating this system, grants to
the poor would provide appropriate consolation.
5. Islam’s very nature is one of frugality and in¬
junctions against luxury. For example, the matter of
clothing: No textile that is excessively steep in price
is permitted to be used (this refers not only to silk
goods). And in all daily commodities, most of all
drinking water, waste is not allowed. Our Muslim
brethren all have this habit as a result of the way they
are raised. Even something as tiny as a grain of food,
they do not dare to throw it away. Currently our coun¬
try is in the midst of the War of Resistance, and so
savings achieved among the rear guard are impera¬
tive. Because Islam is a social system that encour¬
ages savings, it ought to redouble its efforts, and do
its best to be a model for all.
6. Islam prohibits waste and loss. Therefore in the
matter of gambling—Islam has prohibited this from
the start. As for laxness and vice, and other matters
of shamelessness and moral failure, they are all
strictly banned. Generally, when a society is infected
with such evils, it cannot avoid producing unwhole¬
some phenomena that influence the entire nation.
This sort of thing would be a great trouble to the
nation. People of character are greatly distressed
when minor officials and wealthy householders are
wanton and debauched. At this moment, our response
is to promote Islam’s ancient culture so as to keep
such people at bay.
This page intentionally left blank
Glossary
‘ajam, non-Arab
amir, ruler
bay or bey, nobleman or rich man
bid'a, unlawful innovation
falsafa, philosophy
faqih, jurisprudent
fatwa, religious ruling
fiqh, Islamic jurisprudence
hadith, tradition of the Prophet
haji or hajji, Muslim who has been on the hajj, the
pilgrimage to Mecca
haram, religiously prohibited
hijab, modest dress, especially for women
hijra, migration of the Muslims from Mecca to Medina
in the year 622, beginning the Islamic calendar
ifta’, ruling
ijma \ consensus
ijtihad, rational interpretation, literally the intellec¬
tual effort of trained Islamic scholars to arrive
at legal rulings on matters not covered in the
sacred sources
‘ilm, science, knowledge
imam, religious leader
isnad, chain of transmission, or sources
ittiba ‘, critical acceptance of precedent or authority
jihad, religious struggle
kafir, unbeliever
kalam, Islamic theology
khilafat, caliphate
kufr, disbelief
madhhab, one of the four main schools of Sunni Is¬
lamic law
madrasa, seminary
maktab, elementary school
maulavi, religious scholar
mufti, religious official or jurisconsult qualified to
issue ifta’
mujtahid, religious scholar qualified to engage in
ijtihad
mulla, religious scholar
muqallid, follower, one who engages in taqlid
pasha, nobleman
qadi , judge
qanun, law
qiyas, analogical reasoning
salaf, salafiyya, pious ancestors, the early Muslims
sayyid, descendant of the Prophet
shar‘, shari'a, Islamic law
shaykh, religious scholar or holy person
shura, consultation
softa, seminary student
surma, practice of the Prophet
sura, chapter of the Qur’an
tanzimat, reforms intended to make government ad¬
ministration more orderly
taqlid, following precedent or authority
tawhid, divine unity
‘ulama’, religious scholars
umm, mother
umma, community, especially the community of
Muslims
usul, principles
zahir, outward appearance
zakat, alms taxes, one of the five pillars of Islam
377
This page intentionally left blank
Index of Quranic Citations
Sura 1, Verse 111: 187
Sura 2, Verse 22: 281
Sura 2, Verse 29: 58, 239
Sura 2, Verse 30: 306
Sura 2, Verse 33: 315
Sura 2, Verse 42: 124
Sura 2, Verse 60: 310
Sura 2, Verse 63: 350
Sura 2, Verse 78: 234
Sura 2, Verse 112: 297
Sura 2, Verse 121: 235
Sura 2, Verse 129: 297
Sura 2, Verses 131-132: 297
Sura 2, Verse 140: 234
Sura 2, Verse 143: 289
Sura 2, Verse 156: 241
Sura 2, Verse 168: 234
Sura 2, Verse 169: 187, 234
Sura 2, Verse 170: 234, 315, 351
Sura 2, Verse 171: 235
Sura 2, Verse 172: 288
Sura 2, Verse 177: 307
Sura 2, Verse 185: 233, 253
Sura 2, Verse 213: 292
Sura 2, Verses 226-227: 288
Sura 2, Verses 229-230: 288
Sura 2, Verse 233: 203
Sura 2, Verses 237-238: 288
Sura 2, Verse 255: 165
Sura 2, Verse 257: 288
Sura 2, Verse 270: 251
Sura 3, Verse 8, 243
Sura 3, Verse 19: 233, 288, 297
Sura 3, Verse 20: 310
Sura 3, Verse 26: 147
Sura 3, Verse 52: 297
Sura 3, Verse 64: 297
Sura 3, Verse 67: 297
Sura 3, Verse 86: 250
Sura 3, Verse 100: 277, 289
Sura 3, Verse 103: 298, 350, 352,
366
Sura 3, Verse 105: 352
Sura 3, Verse 108: 250
Sura 3, Verse 127: 289
Sura 3, Verse 159: 20, 144, 176
Sura 3, Verse 187: 125
Sura 3, Verses 190-191: 315
Sura 3, Verse 192: 251
Sura 4, Verse 3: 190, 288
Sura 4, Verse 19: 213
Sura 4, Verses 23-25: 288
Sura 4, Verse 28: 253
Sura 4, Verses 29-32: 288
Sura 4, Verses 38-39: 288
Sura 4, Verse 58: 176
Sura 4, Verse 59: 160, 177-178,
186, 189, 243, 350, 374
Sura 4, Verse 83: 186
Sura 4, Verse 105: 350
Sura 4, Verse 123: 351
Sura 4, Verses 127-129: 288
Sura 5, Verse 3: 302
Sura 5, Verse 6: 233
Sura 5, Verse 7: 288
Sura 5, Verse 8: 176
Sura 5, Verse 33: 289
Sura 5, Verse 64: 374
Sura 5, Verse 72: 251
Sura 5, Verse 77: 242
Sura 5, Verse 82: 311
Sura 5, Verse 83: 329
Sura 5, Verse 91: 288
Sura 5, Verse 93: 288
Sura 5, Verse 99: 288
Sura 5, Verse 103: 164
Sura 5, Verse 104: 351
Sura 6, Verses 14-19: 329
Sura 6, Verse 94: 121
Sura 6, Verse 98: 351
Sura 6, Verse 107: 288
Sura 6, Verse 126: 297
Sura 6, Verse 152: 176
Sura 6, Verse 153: 350
Sura 6, Verse 159: 59, 352
Sura 6, Verse 162: 332
Sura 6, Verse 163: 297
Sura 7, Verse 3: 350
Sura 7, Verse 33: 352
Sura 7, Verse 85: 310
Sura 7, Verse 127: 121
Sura 7, Verse 179: 315, 351,
353
Sura 7, Verse 185: 315
Sura 8, Verse 46: 366
Sura 9, Verse 6: 288
379
380 Index of Qur’anic Citations
Sura 9, Verse 31: 122, 169, 233,
298, 354
Sura 9, Verse 60: 288
Sura 10, Verse 13: 301
Sura 10, Verse 99: 288
Sura 11, Verse 112: 350
Sura 11, Verse 117: 79
Sura 12, Verse 40: 161
Sura 12, Verse 81: 187
Sura 12, Verse 108: 350
Sura 13, Verse 4: 352
Sura 13, Verse 11: 55, 121, 374
Sura 14, Verse 13: 78
Sura 15, Verse 9: 55
Sura 16, Verse 8: 183
Sura 16, Verse 37: 288
Sura 16, Verse 43: 353, 361
Sura 16, Verse 84: 288
Sura 16, Verse 89: 351
Sura 16, Verse 116: 248, 352
Sura 17, Verse 16: 78
Sura 17, Verse 36: 187, 239, 352,
361
Sura 18, Verse 28: 288
Sura 18, Verse 40: 288
Sura 20, Verse 47: 123, 174
Sura 20, Verse 128: 352
Sura 21, Verse 23: 20, 118
Sura 21, Verse 80: 239
Sura 22, Verse 13: 140
Sura 23, Verse 47: 121
Sura 23, Verse 63: 289
Sura 24, Verse 30: 199, 203
Sura 24, Verse 31: 73, 199, 202
Sura 24, Verses 32-33: 288
Sura 24, Verse 53: 288
Sura 24, Verse 55: 122
Sura 24, Verse 60: 199, 203
Sura 26, Verse 22: 121
Sura 26, Verse 31: 292
Sura 26, Verse 227: 241
Sura 28, Verse 56: 292
Sura 28, Verse 59: 78
Sura 28, Verse 77: 239, 307, 310-
311
Sura 28, Verse 83: 311
Sura 29, Verse 17: 288
Sura 29, Verse 19: 289
Sura 29, Verse 43: 185
Sura 30, Verse 10: 117
Sura 30, Verse 21: 208
Sura 30, Verse 30: 55, 301
Sura 31, Verse 21: 351
Sura 33, Verse 33: 199, 203
Sura 33, Verse 40: 163
Sura 33, Verse 48: 288
Sura 33, Verse 59: 199, 203
Sura 33, Verse 62: 125
Sura 33, Verses 67-68: 351
Sura 34, Verse 31: 280
Sura 35, Verse 29: 289
Sura 35, Verse 43: 81
Sura 38, Verse 29: 350, 362
Sura 39, Verse 16: 288
Sura 39, Verse 17: 234, 288, 350
Sura 39, Verse 18: 234, 350
Sura 39, Verses 27-28: 352
Sura 40, Verse 16: 147
Sura 40, Verse 26: 117
Sura 40, Verse 85: 351
Sura 41, Verse 34: 55
Sura 42, Verse 10: 186
Sura 42, Verse 10: 350
Sura 42, Verse 38: 176
Sura 42, Verse 47: 288
Sura 43, Verses 23-24: 351
Sura 43, Verse 32: 163
Sura 43, Verse 43: 350
Sura 44, Verse 12: 288
Sura 45, Verses 12-13: 239
Sura 46, Verse 35: 78
Sura 47, Verse 4: 288
Sura 47, Verse 24: 186, 350, 362
Sura 48, Verse 23: 55, 239, 351
Sura 49, Verse 10: 363, 365
Sura 49, Verse 13: 176, 363
Sura 50, Verses 45^16: 288
Sura 53, Verse 23: 161
Sura 53, Verse 28: 315
Sura 53, Verse 39: 239
Sura 54, Verse 17: 350
Sura 54, Verse 43: 351
Sura 56, Verses 13-14: 163
Sura 57, Verse 16: 351
Sura 57, Verse 25: 350
Sura 58, Verse 2: 288
Sura 58, Verse 5: 288
Sura 58, Verse 9: 311
Sura 58, Verse 11: 187
Sura 59, Verse 2: 186, 352
Sura 59, Verse 7: 350
Sura 62, Verses 2-4: 163
Sura 62, Verse 5: 352
Sura 62, Verse 10: 239
Sura 64, Verse 16: 168
Sura 65, Verses 1-2: 288
Sura 65, Verse 6: 288
Sura 67, Verse 15: 239
Sura 68, Verses 37-38: 351
Sura 72, Verses 21-24: 288
Sura 88, Verses 21-24: 288
Sura 89, Verses 11-13: 311
Sura 90, Verses 8-9: 288
Sura 90, Verses 10-15: 288
Sura 96: 317
Sura 103, Verses 1-3: 60
Sura 109: 288
Index of Personal Names
Aaron (Harun), 47, 123
Abazah, Nizar, 181
‘Abbas, Ihsan, 31
‘Abbas, Khedive, 31
‘Abbas ibn ‘Abd al-Muttalib, 123,
210
‘Abd Allah, Muhammad Farid,
207
‘Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan, 330
‘Abd al-Mu‘min, 323
‘Abd al-Qadir ibn Muhyi al-Din
al-Jaza’iri, 9, 11, 19, 133-137,
309
‘Abd al-Rahman ibn ‘Awf, 47
‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Mahdi, 164,
290
‘Abd al-Rahman Khan, 80, 127, 308
‘Abd al-Raziq, ‘Ali, 20
Abdel Kader, Soha, 70
Abdel-Rahim, Muddathir, 96
Abdoulline, Yahya, 5
‘Abduh, Muhammad, 3, 5, 12, 13,
15, 22, 25, 26, 50-60, 61, 66,
68. 70, 77, 78, 79, 83, 86, 93,
103, 152, 183, 198, 199, 242,
254, 314, 339, 349
Abdul Khader Maulavi, Wakkom
Muhammad, 9, 314-315
Abdul Latif, Syed, 22
Abdul Samad. M., 314
Abdulhamid II, 83, 84, 133, 138,
173, 178, 202
‘Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak, 161
‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amr, 164
‘Abdullah ibn Sa‘d ibn Abi Sarh,
98
‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar ibn al-
Khattab, 139, 278
Abdurahman, Abdullah, 20, 90-
92
Abi ‘Awn, 290
Abraham (Ibrahim), 234, 297, 299
Abu ‘Amr ibn al-‘Ala’, 33
Abu Bakar, Sultan, 340, 341, 342
Abu Bakar, Ibrahim bin, 8
Abu Bakr, 43, 55, 88, 93, 94, 95,
167, 169, 209, 319
Abu Bakr ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman al-
Makhzumi, 162
Abu Bakr ibn Sa‘d ibn Zangi, 324
Abu Dharr al-Ghifari, 140, 298
Abu Hamdan, Samir, 61
Abu Hanifa, 32, 161, 165, 167,
233, 236, 279, 280, 281, 284,
285, 321, 354, 361, 366
Abu Hasabu, Afaf Abdel Majid,
96
Abu Hurayra, 81, 162, 163
Abu Ja‘far al-Mansur, 57, 105,
151, 320, 321
Abu Jahl, 275
Abu Lahab, 275
Abu-Lughod, Lila, 23
Abu Nu‘aym al-Isfahani, 164, 185
Abu Sufyan, 318
Abu Talib, 208
Abu ‘Ubayda ibn al-Jarra, 88, 94,
185
Abu Yusuf Ya'qub al-Kindi, 109
Abu Yusuf Ya'qub al-Kufi, 161,
167, 233, 280, 285, 361
Abu Zahra, Nadia, 14
Abucara, Theodoras, 319
AbuT-‘Asi ibn al-Rabi‘, 123
Adam, 48, 308, 344. 363
Adamiyat. Fereydun, 7
Adams, Charles C., 50, 77
Adivar, Halide Edib, 18, 23, 215-
219
‘Adnan, Ma'add ibn, 82
‘Adud al-Din al-Iji, al-, 58
Afghani, Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-,
5. 11, 16, 21, 22, 26, 50, 61, 77,
78, 79, 82, 83, 84, 93, 103-110,
126, 152, 207, 238, 325
Agaoglu, Ahmet, 17, 19, 229-231
Ageron, Charles-Robert, 8
Aghayev, Ahmed, 17, 19, 229-
231
Ahmad, Aziz, 18, 273, 277
Ahmad, Nazir, 15
Ahmad, Shaikh Mahmud, 8
Ahmad. Sirojiddin. 227, 264
Ahmad ibn Hanbal, 57, 85, 159,
162, 166, 167, 171, 236, 237,
279, 281, 284, 353, 361, 366
381
382 Index of Personal Names
Ahmad Khan, Sayyid, 5, 6, 13,
22, 24, 273, 277, 291-303, 304
Ahmad Mulla Jivan, Shaykh, 280
Ahmed, Leila, 25, 61, 70
Ahmed Na‘im Bey, Babanzade,
191
‘A’isha bint Abi Bakr, 84, 209,
210, 278
Ajam, Mogamed Tasleem, 90
‘Ajami, Habib al-, 241
Akhundov (Akhundzada), Mirza
Fatih ‘Ali, 13, 224, 225, 226
Akram Khan, Muhammad, 9,
334-335
Akim, Omer Faruk, 144
Albayrak, Sadik, 175
Alexander, 104, 156
Alfian, 344
Algar, Hamid, 12, 22, 111
‘Ali, Abdul Mukti, 344
‘Ali, Ameer, 22, 26, 290, 316-324
‘Ali, Chiragh, 20, 277-290
‘Ah ibn Abi Talib, 42, 46, 56,
116, 121, 122, 123, 124, 140,
162, 163, 164, 169, 185, 177,
240, 241, 317, 318, 319
‘Ali ibn Musa al-Riza, 318
Ali Pasha, 140
Alimova, D., 257
Aliyev, Ahmad, 257
Allahabadi, Akbar, 16
Allworth, Edward A., 223, 244,
257
‘Alqama al-Kufi, 162
Altinsu, Abdiilkadir, 175
Altstadt, Audrey L., 19, 26, 229
Alusi, Mahmud Shukri al-, 9,
158-171
Amanullah Khan, 79, 80
A‘mash, Abu Muhammad
Sulayman al-, 279
Ambrose, 195
Ameer ‘Ah, 22, 26, 290, 316-324
Amin, Ahmed, 40, 50
Amin, Osman, 50
Amin, Qasim, 23, 24, 61-69
Amin, Sonia Nishat, 23
‘Ammar ibn Yasir, 164
‘Amr al-Shubi, 285
‘Amr ibn al-‘Asi, 88, 94
Amritsari, Khwaja Ahmad Din, 10
Anas ibn Malik, 84, 164, 209, 210
Anisuzzaman, 334
Ansari, Roshan Bayazid, 324
Anushirvan (Khosrow), 120, 241,
320, 329
Apollonius, 322
Anwari, 320
‘Aqil ibn Abi Talib, 123
‘Aqqad, ‘Abbas M. al-, 152
Arat, Zehra F., 23
Archimedes, 208
‘Arfaja ibn Harthama al-Bariki, 311
Aristotle, 58, 106, 109, 149, 307,
321, 322
Arjomand, Said Amir, 12, 20
Arnold, Thomas Walker, 310
Arslan, Shakib, 77
Asbagh ibn al-Faraj, 162
Ash'ari, AbuT-Hasan al-, 37, 57,
58
Ash'ari, Abu Musa al-, 169, 185
Ashhab, 162
Ashtar, Malik, 123
‘Asim bin Thabit, 43
Asma’ bint Yazid, 210
‘Asqalani, Ibn Hajar al-, 186, 285
Aswad ibn Yazid, al-, 162
Asy’ari, Muhammad Hasyim,
365-367
‘Ata’ ibn Abi Rabah, 162, 279
Ataturk, Mustafa Kemal, 200, 215
Athari, Muhammad Bahjat al-, 158
Atjeh, Aboebakar, 365
Attila, 324
Aubin, Franijoise, 368
Awza'i, Abu ‘Amr ‘Abd al-
Rahman al-, 161, 166, 167,
236, 279
‘Ayni, Badr al-Din, 237
Azad, AbuT-Kalam, 8, 11, 22, 26,
325-333
Azhari, Tahir Jalal al-Din al-, 339
Aziz, K. K., 316
Aziz Ahmad, 18, 273, 277
‘Azmi, Mahmud, 80
Azra, Asyumardi, 339
Bacon, Francis, 322
Badat, M. S., 92
Badawi, Ahmad al-, 241
Badran, Ali, 70
Badran, Margot, 11, 24, 70
Badshah Khan, 23
Baghdadi, Abu Bakr al-Khatib al-,
164
Baghdadi, AbuT-Qasim Junayd
al-, 274, 321
Bahan, 138
Bahithat al-Badiya (Malak Hifni
Nasif), 19, 24, 25, 70-76
Bahr al-‘Ulum, ‘Abd al-‘Ali al-
Lakhnawi, 280
Baldauf, Ingeborg, 10
Balic, Smail, 198
Baljon, J. M. S., 11, 291
Banna’, Muhammad ‘Umar al-, 98
Baqillani, Abu Bakr Muhammad
ibn al-Tayyib al-, 57
Baraka (Umm Ayman), 208, 209,
211
Barira, 210
Barlas, Ugurol, 215
Baron, Beth, 24, 70
Basri, Hasan al-, 56, 285
Bastami, Abu Yazid Bayazid al-,
274
Battal-Taymas, Abdullah, 254
Baybacha, Husayn 19
Baydawi, ‘Abdullah al-, 58
Bayhaqi, Ahmad ibn al-Husayn
al-, 81, 166, 186
Bearman, P. J., 9
Bedri, Babikr, 24
Bedri, Yusuf, 24
Behbudiy, Mahmud Khoja, 15,
257-263
Belshazzar, 287
Benda, Harry J., 365
Ben-Dor, Zvi A., 368
Berkes, Niyazi, 25, 192
Beysanoglu, §evket, 192
Bigi, Musa Jarullah, 6, 11, 254—
256
Bihari. Muhibb Allah, 280
Birch, James, 341
Bishr ibn al-Walid, 167
Bishri, Salim al-, 68
Blunt, Wilfrid Scawen, 25, 287
Bonaparte, Napoleon, 109, 156
Boragani, Ilias Mirza, 226
Bosworth, C. E., 14, 15
Bozkurt, Mahmut Esat Bey, 217
Broomhall, Marshall, 12
Brower, Daniel R.. 15
Brown, Daniel W., 10
Brown, Edward G., Ill
Brown, Leon Carl. 40
Brunner, Rainer, 12
Bruno, Giordano, 231, 333
Bubi, ‘Abdullah, 9, 10, 232-237
Buckle, Henry Thomas, 283
Index of Personal Names 383
Bukhari, Muhammad ibn Isma'il
al-, 162, 163, 167, 186, 207,
225, 239, 283, 285, 298, 311,
334, 335, 361
Buzarjumihr, 120
Caesar, Augustus, 322
Caesar, Julius, 239, 241, 329
Calder, N„ 9
Carlyle, Joseph D., 230
Catherine, Queen, 72
Causevic, Mehmed Dzemaluddin,
12, 198-206
Cavagnari, Louis, 127
Qclik. Hliseyin, 138
Qetin, A. Alaaddin, 40
Cemaleddin Efendi, Mehmed, 3,
4, 229
Cevdet, Abdullah, 12, 83, 172-174
Chang Zhimei, 373
Charlemagne, 43
Charles V, 156
Chelmsford, Baron Frederic, 330,
331
Chiragh ‘Ali, 20, 277-290
Chodkiewicz, Michel, 133
Cholpan, Abdulhamid Sulayman,
264-269
Choueiri, Youssef M., 7
Cicero, 213
Clancy-Smith, Julia A., 19
Clarence-Smith, William G., 26
Clark, Peter, 18
Cleopatra, 72
Commins, David D., 10, 27, 158,
181, 207
Constantin, Francois, 86
Constantine, 322
Cooke, Miriam, 24, 70
Cragg, Kenneth, 50
Cromwell, Oliver, 309
Dabashi, Hamid, 20
Dachlan, Achmad, 17, 344-348
Daglioglu, Hikmet Turhan, 149
Dahhan, Sami al-, 207
Damascenus, Johannes, 319
Danziger, Raphael, 133
Dar, B, A., 291
Darimi, ‘Abdullah, 285, 289
Darir, Shaykh al-, 98
Das, Chitta Ranjan, 327
Dasuqi, Ibrahim ibn ‘Abd al-‘Aziz
al-, 241
Dato' Bahaman, Abdul Rahman,
340
Dautovid, Muharem, 198
Dawraqi, Ahmad ibn Ibrahim al-,
167
Daya, Najm al-Din Razi, 372
de Lorey, Eustache, 2, 3
de Slane, William, 281
De Valera, Eamon, 333
Delanoue, Gilbert, 7
Demirdirek, Aynur, 23
Demorgny, Gustave, 13
d’Herbelot, Barthelemy, 230
Dihlawi, Shah Wali Allah al-,
184, 277
Dioscorides, 322
Dogan, Ismail, 138
Dolimov, Ulughbek, 264
Douglas, Ian Henderson, 11, 325
Dozy, Reinhart, 172, 173, 174
Driesmans, Heinrich, 212
Dudoignon, Stephane, 14, 244,
257
Durakba$a, Ayjc. 215
Dust Muhammad Khan, 126
Easwaran, Eknath, 23
Ebussu'ud Efendi, Mehmed, 139,
255
Eccel, A. Chris, 12
Edward VII, 310
Edward VIII, 327
El Essawi, Raghda, 61
El Hadidi, Hager, 96, 158, 207
Elliot, Henry, 278
Elizabeth, Queen, 72
Ende, Werner, 12
Enginiin, Inci, 215
Esposito, John L., 6, 27, 93, 277,
304, 316
Eve, 344
Euclid, 321, 322
Fadel, Mohammad, 10
Fahmi, Mansur, 77
Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, 58, 302, 335
Fakhreddin, Rizaeddin bin, 10,
14, 19, 23, 238-243
Farabi, Abu Ibrahim al-, 225
Fareed, Muneer Goolam, 9
Farsy, Shaykh Abdallah Salih, 86
Faruqi, ‘Imadulhasan Azad, 325
Faruqi, Mahmud Jawnpuri, 105—
106
Fatima, 123, 318
Fatma Nesibe Hamm, 23
Fawwaz, Zaynab, 24
Fazil, Mustafa, 20, 140
Federspiel, Howard M., 344, 349,
355, 360, 365
Feng Jinyuan, 368
Ferdinand III, 310
Firuzabadi, Muhammad ibn
Ya‘qub, 121
Fisher, Alan W., 223
Fitrat, Abdurrauf, 11, 14, 15, 25,
244-253
Fluehr-Lobban, Carolyn, 96
Fliigel, Gustav, 316
Foche, Ferdinand, 89
Forward, Martin, 316
Framurz Khan, 308
Frasheri, §emseddin Sami, 7, 19,
22, 149-151
Freitag, Ulrike, 26
Fu‘ad, 78
Galen, 322
Galileo, 106, 231, 326
Gandhi, Mahatma Mohandas, 327,
332, 333
Gasprinskii, Ismail Bey, 5, 13, 22,
223-226
Gelvin, James C„ 15
Genghis Khan, 117, 156, 266, 320
George III, 46
Gerbert (Sylvester II), 322
Ghalib, 273
Ghani, Ashraf, 126
Ghannouchi, Rachid al-, 26
Ghazali, Amal, 5
Ghazzali, Abu Hamid Muhammad
al-, 42, 44, 45, 58, 60, 77, 106,
159, 161, 183, 184, 186, 187,
225, 234, 353
Ghifari, Abu Dharr al-, 140, 298
Gibb. H. A. R., 316
Gibbon, Edward, 324
Gladstone, William, 309, 341
Gobineau, Joseph-Arthur, 324
Gokalp, Ziya, 192-197
Golden, Ian, 90
Goldziher, Ignac, 25, 26
Gole, Niliifer, 24
Goodman, Howard L., 368
Gregorian, Vartan, 7, 126
Gregory I, 322
Gregory VII, 194
384 Index of Personal Names
Griffith, Arthur, 333
Gross, Jo-Ann, 19
Gumiijhanevi, Ahmed Ziyaeddin,
140
Guy, A., 173
Habib al-‘Ajami, 241
Habibullah Khan, 126, 128
Haddad, Tahar, 24
Hadi, Musa al-, 110
Hadi, Sayid Syekh al-, 8
Hafez, Sabry, 15
Hafiz, 173, 247
Hai Weiliang, 373
Hairi, Abdul-Hadi, 4, 116
Hajib, Yusuf Khass, 224
Hajjaj ibn Yusuf, 34, 140, 330
Hakim, Siraj al-Din, 14
Hakim al-Naysaburi, Muhammad
ibn ‘Abdullah al-, 81
Hakki, Ismail, 149
Halabi, Ibrahim, 237
Haleirenyi, 372
Hali, Khwaja Altaf Hussein, 7, 14,
273-276, 291
Halil, Ahmet, 188
Hallaq, Wael B., 10
Hamawi, Yaqut al-Rumi al-, 99
Hammad ibn Yahya al-Abahh, 164
Hamori, Andras, 26
Hamori, Ruth, 26
Hamza Hakimzada Niyazi, 17
Hamzah, Abu Bakar, 339
Hanaway, William L., 244
Hang Tuah, 341
Hanioglu, M. Siikrii, 4, 12, 138,
144, 149, 172, 175, 188, 192,
215
Hannad ibn al-Sari, 290
Hardy, Peter, 277
Harith ibn al-‘Amr, 290
Harith ibn ‘Awn, 290
Harrison, Christopher, 13
Harun (Aaron), 47, 123
Harun al-Rashid, 151, 236
Hasan, Mushirul, 325
Hasan ibn ‘Ali, 177
Hashim, Abu’l-Qasim Ahmad, 98
Hashim, Muhammad, 99
Hassan, Ahmad, 10, 360-364
Haydar, Hoca Eminefendizade
‘Ali, 200
Haytami, Abu’l-‘Abbas Ibn Hajar
al-, 158, 159, 166, 366
Haytham ibn Jamil, al-, 167
Heraclius, 138
Hermansen, Marcia K., 273, 277,
291, 304, 316, 325
Heyd, Uriel, 192
Hilali, Sulayman ibn Yasar al-,
162
Hilmi Pasha, HUseyin, 83
Hind, 318
Hinnebusch, Thomas, 86
Hippocrates, 299, 300
Hogg, Peter, 24
Hojjati Kermani, Mohammad
Javad, 26
Hossein, Rokeya Sakhawat, 23
Hourani, Albert, 4, 31, 40, 77
Houtsma, M. Th., 172
Hu Dengzhou, Elias (Xian Dahu),
370, 372
Hughes, Thomas Patrick, 284
Hulagu, 324
Humboldt, Alexander von, 321
Hurr ibn Yazid Riyahi, 122, 124
Husain, Munawwar, 277
Husaynibn ‘Ali, 122, 124, 125
Husayn, Taha, 27
Husayn al-Zahra’, 98
Husayn Shah, Sultan, 340
HUseyin Hilmi Pasha, 83
Husry, Khaldun S. al-, 31, 40, 152
Huss, Jan, 231
Ibn ‘Abbas, ‘Abdullah, 123, 162,
169, 185, 318
Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr, 285
Ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab, Muhammad,
159-160
Ibn Abi ‘Asim al-Dahhak, Abu
Bakr, 285-286
Ibn Abi Hatim, ‘Abd al-Rahman,
165
Ibn ‘Abidin, Shaykh Muhammad,
42
Ibn al-‘Arabi, Muhyi al-Din, 44,
47,48, 133, 159, 165, 186, 241,
281, 284, 353
Ibn al-Hajj, Abu ‘Abdullah
Muhammad, 60
Ibn al-Humam, Muhammad. 237
Ibn al-Jawzi, AbuT-Faraj, 322
Ibn al-Majishun, 162
Ibn al-Mu‘adhdhal, Ahmad, 162
Ibn al-Qass, ‘Abu al-‘Abbas al-
Tabari, 186
Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyya,
Muhammad, 161-163, 164,
166, 169, 170, 171, 185
Ibn al-Salah, Taqi al-Din al-
Shahrazuri, 159, 166
Ibn Babawayh, Muhammad, 317
Ibn Badis, ‘Abd al-Hamid, 10, 13,
20, 93-95
Ibn Bajja, 109
Ibn Burhan, 353
Ibn Daqiq al-‘Aid, 353
Ibn Dawud ibn ‘Ali, Muhammad,
285
Ibn Faris al-Qazwini, Ahmad, 183
Ibn Habban, Muhammad, 281, 284
Ibn Hajar al-Haytami, AbuT-
‘Abbas, 158, 159, 165, 166,
366
Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, 186, 285
Ibn Hamid, 161
Ibn Hatim, ‘Adi, 354
Ibn Hazm, Abu Muhammad ‘Ali,
165, 281, 284, 286
Ibn Kemal (Kemalpajazade), 255
Ibn Khaldun, 44, 45, 225, 309
Ibn Khallikan, 99, 281
Ibn Majah al-Qazwini, Muhammad
ibn Yazid, 283
Ibn Mas‘ud, ‘Abdullah, 162, 167,
169, 278, 285
Ibn Qutayba, Abu Muhammad, 99
Ibn Rahwayh, Ishaq Abu Ya'qub,
162, 279
Ibn Rushd, 109, 149, 150
Ibn Saba’, ‘Abdullah, 55, 56
Ibn Sa‘ud, 216
Ibn Shurayh, 161
Ibn Sina, ‘Ali Husayn, 150, 225
Ibn Taymiyya, Taqi al-Din, 14,
77, 158, 165, 166, 167-169,
171, 238, 242
Ibn Tufayl. Abu Bakr Muhammad,
109
Ibn ‘Umar, 169
Ibn Zahir, Abu Marwan, 323
Ibn Ziyad al-Lu’lu'i, al-Hasan,
161
Ibn Zuhr, Abu Marwan, 323
Ibrahim (Abraham), 234, 297, 299
Ibrahim ibn Adham, 241
Ibshihi, Muhammad, 316
Ihsanoglu. Ekmeleddin, 14
‘Ikrima, 162
‘Illaysh, Muhammad, 242
Index of Personal Names 385
Ilyas, Khizr, 240
'Imara, Muhammad, 31, 50, 61
Imart, Guy, 13
Iqbal, Muhammad, 7, 8, 9, 17, 25,
304-313
‘Isa (Jesus), 44, 138, 169, 240,
241, 288, 307, 312, 323, 326,
328
Isaac ( Ishaq), 234
Isabel. Queen, 72
Isfahani, Abu Faraj al-, 99
Isfahani, Abu Nu‘aym al-, 164, 185
Isfahani al-Zahiri, Abu Sulayman
Dawud, 279, 281, 284, 285
Isfara’ini, ‘Isam al-Din al-, 47
Isfira‘ini, Abu Ishaq al-, 57
Ishaq (Isaac), 234
Isma'il (Ishmael), 234, 297, 299
Ismail, E. H„ 90
Isma‘il Shahid, Shah Muhammad,
292
Issawi, Charles, 31
Izmirli, Ismail Hakki, 14
Jabarti, ‘Abd al-Rahman, 240
Jabir ibn Zayd, 162
Jabri, ‘Abd al-Muta‘al
Muhammad, 70
Jacob (Ya‘qub), 234
Jafar, Abu, 334
Ja‘far al-Firyabi, 167
Ja‘far al-Sadiq, 316, 318, 319
Jahiz, al-, 99, 150
Jainuri, Achmad, 344
Jalal, Ayesha, 13, 15
Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, Sayyid,
5, 11, 16, 21, 22, 26, 50, 61, 77,
78, 79, 82, 83, 84, 93, 103-110,
126, 152, 207, 238, 325
Jami, 371
Jan Muhammad Khan, 308
Jarir ibn ‘Abdullah, 84
Jarjawi, ‘Ali Ahmad, 14
Jassas, Ahmad ibn ‘Ali al-, 199,
200, 202
Javadi, Hasan, 22
Jawnpuri, Sayyid Karamat ‘Ali,
318
Jawziyya, Muhammad Ibn al-
Qayyim al-, 161-163, 164, 166,
169, 170, 171, 185
Jaza’iri, ‘Abd al-Qadir ibn Muhyi
al-Din al-, 9, 11, 19, 133-137,
309
Jaza’iri, Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-
Qadir al-, 133
Jesus (‘Isa), 44, 138, 169, 240, 241,
288, 307, 312, 323, 326, 328
Jiekang gong (Liu Zhi), 373
Jilani, ‘Abd al-Qadir, 240-241,
321
Jisr, Shaykh Husayn al-, 77, 207
Joan of Arc, 72, 231
Jong, Frederick de, 19
Ju‘fi, Mufazzal ibn ‘Umar, 318
Junayd, Shaykh, 274
Junayd al-Baghdadi, Abu’l-
Qasim, 274, 321
Jurshi, Salah al-Din al-, 93
Justinian, 319
Juwayni, Abu’l-Ma‘ali, 57, 159,
161, 186
Kahfi, Emi Haryanti, 355
Kajee, Abdulla Ismail, 92
Kamil, Mustafa, 16, 342, 343
Kamp, Marianne R., 23
Kanlidere, Ahmet, 12, 232, 238,
254
Kaplan, Mehmed, 144
Karamat ‘Ali Jawnpuri, Sayyid,
318
Kardaij, Riza, 192
Karic, Enes, 198
Karimov, Ghilman ibn Ibrahim,
226
Karimov, Naim, 264
Karkhi, Abu’l-Hasan, 284-285
Katib Qelebi, Haji Khalifa, 316
Kashghari, Sadid al-Din, 167
Kawakibi, ‘Abd al-Rahman al-, 7,
14, 18, 19, 152-157
Kazim, Musa, 10, 24, 83, 175-
180
Keddie, Nikki R., 14, 22, 103
Kedourie, Elie, 103
Kemal, Namik, 5, 6, 20, 144-148,
192
Kemalpajazade (Ibn Kemal), 255
Kendirbay, Gulnar, 17
Kepler, Johannes, 106, 224
Kermani, Mohammad Javad
Hojjati, 26
Kerr, Malcolm H„ 3, 50
Khadija bint Khuwaylid, 123,
208, 209, 211
Khalid, Adeeb, 15, 17, 227, 244,
257, 264
Khalid ibn al-Walid, 43, 89, 138,
140
Khalid ibn Yazid al-Umawi, Abu
Hashim, 318
Khalkhali, Sayyid ‘Abd al-‘Azam
‘Imad al-‘Ulama’, 20
Khan, Muhammad Akram, 9,
334-335
Kharija ibn Zayd, 162
Khatib al-Tibrizi, Muhammad,
289
Khawla bint al-Azwar al-Kindi,
72
Khawlani, Abu Idris al-, 165
Khawlani, Abu Muslim al-, 45,
165
Khayali, Ahmad ibn Musa al-, 47
Khayr al-Din, 6, 11, 17, 18,21,
22, 40-49
Khizr Ilyas, 240
Khosrow (Nushirvan), 120, 241,
320, 329
Khuda Bakhsh, Salah al-Din, 18
Khuluq, Lathiful, 365
Khuri, Ra’if, 31
Kia, Mehrdad, 13
Kindi, Abu Yusuf Ya'qub al-, 109
Kinmli, Hakan. 12, 223
Komatsu, Hisao, 244
Kramer, Martin, 13
Kremer, Alfred von, 321
Krieken, G. S. van, 40
Kumayl ibn Ziyad al-Nakha‘i, 163
Kuntay, Mithat Cemal, 144
Kurzman. Charles, 3, 4, 8, 9, 17,
20, 24, 90, 96, 103, 111
Kushner, David, 175
Kuttner, Thomas, 13, 223
Laffan, Michael F„ 14, 15, 339
Lakhnawi, ‘Abd al-‘Ali al-, 280
Laksamana, Bani, 341
Lane, Edward W„ 288, 289
Lane-Poole, Stanley, 288
Laoust, Henri, 14
Latif, Syed Abdul, 22
Layth ibn Sa'd, 279
Lazzerini, Edward J., 15, 19, 223
Le Chatelier, Alfred, 230
Lelyveld, David, 23
Levend, Agah Strri, 149
Lewis, Bernard, 9, 18, 273, 304
Lewis, Gavin, 90
Li Xinghua, 368
386 Index of Personal Names
Li Yanxiang (Yuchen), 373
Liu Zhi (Jiekang gong), 373
Livingston, John W., 22
Lloyd George, David, 331
Lobban, Richard A., Jr., 96
Lorey, Eustache de, 2, 3
Louis XI, 36
Luther, Martin, 12, 254, 255, 306,
309
Ma Dexin (Ma Fuchu), 373
Ma Fuchu (Ma Dexin), 373
Ma Jian, 373
Ma Shou-qian, 368
Ma Wanfu, 373
Ma Zhao-chun, Ibrahim, 368
Ma'arri, Abu al-‘Ala’ al-, 255
MacColl, Malcolm, 277, 278
Macdonald, Duncan Black, 3, 4
Maecenas, Gaius, 322
Maghribi, ‘Abd al-Qadir al-, 16,
18, 23, 207-214
Maglajlic, Ibrahim, 201, 205
Mahbubi, ‘Ubaydallah, 237
Mahdi, al-, 320
Mahdi, Muhammad Ahmad al-, 98
Mahjub, Muhammad Ahmad, 26,
96-100
Mahmud II, 217
Mahmud Shah, Sultan, 340
Majeed, Javed, 14, 273
Majlisi, Baqir ibn Muhammad
Taqi al-, 316, 319
Makhzumi, Abu Bakr ibn ‘Abd al-
Rahman al-, 162
Maksudi, Ahmed Hadi Efendi,
225
Malik, Hafeez, 291, 304
Malik ibn Anas, 162, 165, 166,
167, 236, 237, 279, 280, 281,
284, 334, 354, 361, 366
Malik Shah, 321
Malikyar, Helena, 126
Malkan, Abdul Munir, 344, 365
Malkum Khan, 12, 25, 111-115
Mamaqani, Asadullah, 12
Ma’mun, ‘Abdullah al-, 105, 151,
281, 321, 322, 323
Mansurizade Mehmed Sa‘id, 188—
191
Mansuroglu, Mecdut, 188
Mardin, §erif, 20, 21, 138, 144
Marghinani, Burhanuddin, 202,
237, 335, 353
Marjani, Shihabuddin, 12
Marwan, 56
Mary (Maryam), 169
Masa’ad, Ishaq, 50
Masruq, 162
Massignon, Louis, 158
Mas'udi, 321
Mathews, David J., 291
Matthee, Rudi, 14
Maturidi, Abu Mansur al-, 37
Mawardi, ‘Ali ibn Muhammad al-,
47
Mawwaq, Abu ‘Abdullah al-
Ghamati, al-, 42
Mazarin, Jules, 109
Mazrui, Shaykh al-Amin bin ‘Ali
al-, 7, 23, 86-89
Mehmet Fatih (Muhammad II),
156, 309
Meiji, Mutsuhito, 83, 341
Melikov Zerdabi, Hasan Bey, 224,
226
Menshikov, Aleksandr
Sergeyevich, 146
Merad, Ali, 10, 13
Merdani Bey, ‘Ah, 226
Merhemic, Hadzi Mujaga, 198—
201
Mervin, Sabrina, 12
Messick, Brinkley, 16
Metcalf, Barbara, 11, 24
Miliukov, Pavel N., 230
Mill, John Stuart, 46, 327
Miller, Roland E., 314
Minault, Gail, 23, 273, 277, 316
Minhadji, Akhmad, 360
Mirsepassi, Ali, 17
Mirzoev, Sobir, 126
Misbach, Hadji Mohammad, 18
Mitchell, Timothy, 21
Moaddel, Mansoor, 13
Mobini-Kesheh, Natalie, 18, 349
Moore, John, 341
Moses (Musa), 47, 121, 123, 312
Mu‘adh ibn Jabal, 9, 162, 169,
186, 209, 289, 290, 316
Mu‘awiyya ibn Abi Sufyan, 45,
82, 121, 124, 169, 209, 250
Mubarak, ‘Ali, 15
Mubarrad, Muhammad al-, 99
Mueller, Friedrich Max, 230
Mughira ibn Shu‘ba, 290
Mughith, 210
Muhammad, Prophet, passim
Muhammad II (Mehmet Fatih),
156, 309
Muhammad Ahmad al-Mahdi, 98
Muhammad al-Baqir, 319
Muhammad ‘Ali, 78, 79, 98, 156
Muhammad ibn Bishar, 290
Muhammad ibn Ja‘far, 290
Muhammad ibn Sirin, Abu Bakr,
285
Muhammad Ya‘qub Khan, 127
Muhammadukunnu, M., 314
Muir, Sir William, 283, 284
Mu‘izz li-Din Allah, al-, 322
Mujahid ibn Jabr al-Makki, 162,
278
Mulla Sadra, 105
Munawi, ‘Abd al-Ra’uf al-, 158,
159
Munshi, ‘Abdullah bin ‘Abdul
Kadir, 340, 341
Murad, Mehr Afroz, 14
Musa (Moses), 47, 121, 123, 312
Musa al-Kazim, 321
Musa Kazim, 10, 24, 82, 175-180
Musa, Nabawiyah, 11
Musa al-Hadi, 110
Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj Nishapuri,
84, 186, 283, 289, 298, 311,
361
Mustafa Kemal Atatiirk, 200, 215
Mustafa Fazil, 20, 140
Mustafa Kamil. 16, 342, 343
Mustansir b‘illah, al-, 321
Musta‘sim, 324
Mu‘tadid b‘illah, 321
Mutanabbi. al-, 107, 156
Mularrif ibn ‘Abdullah, al-, 162
Mutarrizi, Nasir ibn ‘Abd al-
Sayyid, 371
Mutawakkil, 321
Mutsuhito Meiji, 83, 341
Muzaffar, Chandra, 26
Muzaffar, Amir, 244
Muzaffar, Muhammad Rida al-,
12
Muzani, Isma‘il ibn Yahya al-,
166
Muzayyan al-Saltana, Maryam
Amid, 23
Na Zijia, 373
Naba‘a, 209
Nabhani, Yusuf al-, 5, 158-171
Nabulusi, ‘Abd al-Ghani, 280
Index of Persona] Names 387
Nadir Shah, 324
Nafi\ 162
Nafisa, Sayyida, 74
Nagiria, 23
Na'im Bey, Babanzade Ahmed,
191
Na'ini. Muhammad Husayn, 9,
10, 11, 20, 116-125
Najmabadi, Afsaneh, 23, 25
Najm al-Din Razi Daya, 372
Nakash, Yitzhak, 12
Nakha'i, Ibrahim al-, 167
Nakha'i, Kumayl ibn Ziyad al-,
163
Namik Kemal, 5, 6, 20, 144-148,
192
Naqshband, Baha’uddin, 241
Nasafi, ‘Abdullah ibn Ahmad al-,
280
Nasa’i, Abu ‘Abd al-Rahman,
283
Nasif, Malak Hifni (Bahithat al-
Badiya), 19, 24, 25, 70-76
Nasiri, Qayyum Efendi, 224
Nasr, Seyyid Vali Reza, 26
Nava’i, ‘Alishir, 247
Nawawi, Muhyi al-Din al-, 353
Nawbakht, 321
Nawid, Senzil, 21, 25
Nazir Muhammad Safar Khan,
308
Nazzam al-Balkhi, Abu Ishaq
Ibrahim ibn Sayyar al-, 281,
284, 285
Nelson, Horatio, 341
Newton, Isaac, 106, 224
Nicholson, Reynold A., 8
Nightingale, Pamela, 19
Nikon, 195
Nimrod, 275
Nishapuri, Abu’l-Hasan ‘Ali, 302
Niyazi, Hamza Hakimzada, 17
Nizam al-Mulk, 321
Noer, Deliar, 18, 349, 355
Norris, H. T„ 19
Nu'mani, Muhammad Shibli, 14
Nushirvan (Khosrow), 120, 241,
320, 329
Nttwa, 371
Niizhet, Ali, 192
Olesen, Asta, 21
Osborn, Robert Durie, 281, 284,
286, 287, 288
Ozalp, Omer Hakan, 238
Ozon, Mustafa Kemal, 144
Paksoy, H, B., 223
Palmer, Edward Henry, 289
Pangu, 371
Parham, Baqir, 116
Parieu, Felix Esquirou de, 140, 141
Parwana Khan, 308
Peacock, James L., 344
Peter I, 156, 195
Petersen, Ken, 264
Peterson, Samiha Sidhom, 61
Petrov, E. K., 230
Pickthall, Marmaduke, 18
Pijper, G. F., 355, 360
Pitt, William, 341
Plato, 58, 139, 299, 322
Pollard, Lisa, 25, 61
Pouwels, Randall L., 86
Powell, Eve Troutt, 18
Pritchett, Frances W., 15, 273
Ptolemy, 179, 224, 321, 322
Pythagoras, 103
Qaffal, Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn
‘Ali al-Shashi al-, 161
Qalqashandi, Shihabuddin Ahmad
al-, 99
Qari, Munawwar, 12, 227-228
Qasim Amin, 23, 24, 61-69
Qasim ibn Muhammad, al-, 162
Qasimi, Jamal al-Din al-, 9, 10,
181-187
Qasimi, Zafir, 181
Qasri, Khalid ibn ‘Abdullah al-,
330
Qibti, Fakhri Faraj Mikhail al-, 80
Qifti, Jamal al-Din ‘Ali ibn Yusuf
al-, 318
Qiu Shusen, 368
Quhistani, Shamsuddin. 235
Qushayri, Bakr Abu al-Fadl ibn
Muhammad ibn ‘Ala’ al-Din al-,
161, 162
Qutayba, 164
Rabih, Turki, 93
Radlov, Vasilii Vasil’evich, 224
Radtke, Bemd, 19
Rafa’i al-Qazwini, Abu’l Qadir al-,
353
Raffles, Thomas Stamford, 340
Rafida, 211
Rahamana, E. T, M. Atikura, 334
Rahman, Fazlur, 6, 25
Rahme, Joseph G., 152
Ra’in, Isma'il, 111
Ramli, Muhammad ibn Ahmad, 366
Ramses II, 104
Raphael, 149
Rashid, Fatima, 24
Rashid Rida, Muhammad, 5, 6, 7,
8, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 24, 50,
77-85, 86, 314, 339
Rashidi, ‘A. ‘A., 242
Rashidova, D., 257
Rawlinson, George, 230
Razi, Fakhr al-Din al-, 58, 302, 335
Razi Daya, Najm al-Din, 372
Reading, Rufus D. I., 330
Reichmuth, Stefan, 11
Rejali, Darius M., 21
Rejwan, Nissim, 27
Renan, Ernest, 107, 108, 109, 230
Richard, Yann, 10
Rida, Muhammad Rashid, 5, 6, 7,
8, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 24, 50,
77-85, 86, 314, 339
Riddell, Peter G„ 26
Rifa‘i, Ahmad al-, 241
Ringer, Monica, 14
Risk, Heba Mostafa, 31
Rizaeddin bin Fakhreddin, 10, 14,
19, 23, 238-243
Roberts, Frederick, 127, 309
Robinson, Francis, 16
Rodwell, J, M., 288, 289
Roff, William R„ 4, 15, 339
Rorlich, Azade-Ayje, 15, 232,
238, 254
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, 140, 306
Rudelson, Justin Jon, 17
Rumi, Jalal al-Din al-, 174
Russell, Ralph, 15, 17
Ruyani, Abu’l-Mahasin al-, 159
Sa‘d ibn Mu'adh. 211
Sa’di, 173, 324, 372
Sadiq, Muhammad al-, 41
Sadik Bey §ehrekii§tii, Mehmed, 83
Sadri, Mahmoud. 3, 111, 116
Saffah, Abu’l-‘Abbas, 320
Safi al-Hindi (‘Ala’ al-Din al-
Hindi al-Baqi), 353
Sahnun ibn Sa‘id, 162
Sa‘id, Mansurizade Mehmed,
188-191
388 Index of Personal Names
Saint-Yves, Georges, 230
Sakai, Fahri, 229
Salah al-Din (Saladin), 156, 318
Sale, George, 289
Salim, 162
Salim, Ahmed I., 86
Salim, Hadji Agus, 8, 18, 19,
355-359
Salisbury, Robert Cecil, 341
Salman, 42
Samarra’i, Ibrahim, 158
Sammu-ramat (Semiramis), 104
Sayf, Tawfiq, 116
Sayyid Ahmad Khan, 5, 6, 13, 22,
24, 273, 277, 291-303, 304
Sayyid, Mutarrizi, Nasir ibn ‘Abd
al-, 371
Sayyid al-Sanad, 47
Schacht, J., 9
Schimmel, Annemarie, 304
Schinasi, May, 126
§ehrekii§tii, Mehmed Sadik Bey, 83
Selim I, 323
Sell, Edward, 279, 280, 284, 285,
290
Semiramis (Sammu-ramat), 104
Servier, Andre, 212
§evket Pasha, Mahmud, 83
Sha'bi, ‘Amir ibn Sharahil al-,
162, 279
Shackle, Christopher, 14, 273
Shall‘i, Abu ‘Abdullah
Muhammad al-, 159, 161, 162,
166, 167, 233, 236, 237, 279,
281, 284, 353, 361, 362, 366
Shahbander, Sumayya Damluji, 6
Shahin, Emad Eldin, 8, 31, 40, 50,
61, 77, 93
Shahrazuri, Taqi al-Din Ibn al-
Salah al-, 159, 166
Shaifta, 273
Shajarat al-Durr, 72
Sharafuddeen, S., 314
Sha'rani, ‘Abd al-Wahhab al-, 158
Sharara, Muhsin, 12
Sha'rawi, Huda, 70
Shari‘at-Sangalaji, Mirza Riza
Quli, 10
Shatibi, Ibrahim ibn Musa al-,
160, 162, 236
Shaukani, Muhammad ibn ‘Ah, 335
Shaybani, Muhammad ibn al-
Hasan al-, 161, 185, 233, 236,
237, 285
Shaykhzada, ‘Abd al-Rahman,
237
Shibli, Abu Bakr, 321
Shibli Nu'mani, Muhammad, 14
Shir ‘Ali Khan, 127
Shiraishi, Takashi, 18, 355
Shirazi, Mirza Saleh, 14
Shissler, A. Holly, 229
Shu'ba ibn al-Hajjaj, 290
Shur, ‘Abd al-Bashir, 126
Shurahbil ibn Hasana, 88
Shurayh ibn al-Harith al-Kindi,
161, 162, 177
Sidahmed, Abdel Salam, 96
Siddiqi, Mazheruddin, 19
Sihvarvi, Muhammad
Hifzurrahman, 18
Sijistani, Abu Da’ud al-, 81, 166,
186, 283, 289
Sindhi, ‘Ubaydullah, 19
Singh, Durlab, 325
Siraj al-Din Hakim, 14
Sirriyeh, Elizabeth, 19
Siyalkuti, ‘Abd al-Hakim, 47
Skovgaard-Petersen, Jakob, 14, 15
Skrine, C. P., 19
Sladen, Douglas, 2, 3
Slane, William, 281
Smith, Wilfred Cantwell, 18, 316
Socrates, 299, 300, 326
Solomon, 32
Soloviev, Vladimir S., 230
Sonbol, Amira El-Azhary, 12
Spencer, Herbert, 70
Steel, Laurel, 273
Stewart, Devin, 50, 158
Strobel, Margaret, 23
Suavi, Ali, 8, 13, 20, 138-143
Subki, Taqi al-Din al-, 166
Sudur, Tura Khwaja, 251
Sufyan al-Thawri, 161, 167, 236,
279
Sufyan ibn ‘Uyayna, 185, 279
Suhrawardi, Shihab al-Din, 318
Sukayna bint al-Husayn, Sayyida,
74
Sulayman, 216, 255, 321, 323
Sulayman ibn Yasar al-Hilali, 162
Suny, Ronald Grigor, 19
Surkati, Syekh Ahmad, 9, 13,
349-354
Siissheim, Karl, 172
Suyuti, Jalal al-Din al-, 81, 110,
159, 165, 183, 184
Swettenham, Frank, 341
Swietochowski, Tadeusz, 11, 23,
229
Sylvester II (Gerbert), 322
Tabari, Muhammad ibn Jarir al-,
279
Tabataba’i, Muhammad, 7
Taftazani, Sa‘d al-Din, 47, 225
Tagiev, H. Z. A., 19
Taha, ‘Abbas bin Muhammad, 339
Tahir, Mahmud, 238
Tahtawi, Rifa'a Rafi‘ al-, 7, 13,
14, 20, 31-39
Talas, Muhammad As‘ad, 207
Talattof, Kamran, 13
Taqizada, Hasan, 17
Tartushi, Ibn Abi Randaqa Abu
Bakr, 311
Tarzi, Mahmud, 6, 21, 25, 126-
BO
Tarzi, Surrayya, 25
Tauber, Eliezer, 152
Tavakoli-Targhi, Mohamad, 14, 25
Tawfiq, 52
Tawus ibn Kaysan, 162
Tha'alibi (Thaalbi), ‘Abd al-‘Aziz
al-, 8
ThaTabi, Ahmad ibn Muhammad
al-, 32
Thanavi, Ashraf ‘Ali, 24
Themistius, 322
Tibawi, A. L., 17
Timur, Amir, 244, 266, 323
Tirmidhi, Abu ‘Isa Muhammad al-,
165, 186, 283, 289, 290
Topchibashiyev, ‘Ali Merdan
Bey, 226
Traljic, Mahmud, 198
Tregonning, K. G., 15
Troll, Christian W., 291
Turan Shah, 72
Turayhi, Fakhr al-Din, 121
Tiirkoglu, Ismail, 238
Tiirkytlmaz, Yektan, 175
Tusun. ‘Umar Pasha, 80
Tiitengil, Cavit Orhan, 192
‘Ubayd Allah ibn ‘Abd Allah ibn
‘Utba. 162
Ubayy ibn Ka‘b. 169
Uddin, Sufia, 334
Ulken, Hilmi Ziya, 14, 192
‘Umar ibn ‘Abd al-Aziz, 56, 278
Index of Personal Names 389
‘Umar ibn al-Khattab, 11, 44, 45,
47, 48, 55, 72, 82, 94, 121, 139,
140, 156, 162, 167, 169, 185,
208, 209, 278, 307, 319
Umm ‘Atiyya, 210
Umm Ayman (Baraka), 208, 209,
211
Umm Hani’ bint Abi Talib, 211
Umm Kabsha, 210
Umm Salama, 210
Umm Salim, 210
Umm Sinan, 210, 211
Urbain, Thomas Ismael, 7
‘Urwa ibn al-Zubayr, 162
Usama ibn Zayd, 94
‘Utba ibn Farqad, 82
‘Uthman, 55, 140, 169, 318, 319
‘Uthman, Fathi, 93
Valmont, Edouard, 3
Van der Ross, R. E., 90
Voll, lohn Obert, 6, 96
Voltaire, Francois Marie, 230, 309
Wagner, E., 14
Waki‘ ibn al-Jarrah, 161, 290
Wakkom Maulavi, Muhammad
Abdul Khader, 9, 314-315
Wali Allah al-Dihlawi, Shah, 184,
277
Wang Daiyu (Zhenhui Laoren),
373
Wang Jingzhai, Ya'qub, 26, 368-
375
Wasi‘i, ‘Abd al-Wasi al-, 16
Wasif, Muhammad Sarwar, 21
Wasil ibn ‘Ata’, 56, 57
Weismann, Itzchak, 19, 133
Wellington, Duke of (Arthur
Wellesley), 309, 341
Wilson, Samuel Graham, 25
Xi Kang, 372
Xian Dahu (Elias Hu Dengzhou),
370, 372
Yang lingxiu (Zhongming), 373
Yang Keli, 368
Ya'qub (lacob), 234
Ya’qub al-Mansur, 323
Yaqut al-Rumi al-Hamawi, 99
Yared, Nazik Saba, 6
Yasawi, Ahmad, 241
Yazid ibn Mu'awiyya, 124-125
Yazid ibn Abi Sufyan, 88
Yaziji, Nasif al-, 99
Yuchen (Li Yanxiang), 373
Yusuf ibn Tashfin, 323
Zaghlul, Sa'd Pasha, 79
Zahhak, 117
Zahiri, Dawud Abu Sulayman
Isfahani al-, 279, 281, 284, 285
Zamakhshari, Abu'l Qasim
Mahmud al-, 317
Zaman, Muhammad Qasim, 12,
16, 17
Zarkashi, Muhammad ibn
Bahadur al-, 184
Zayd ibn Thabit, 162, 164, 185
Zaynab, 123
Zein-ed-Din, Nazira, 23-24
Zeki Efendi, 201
Zerdabi, Hasan Bey Melikov, 224,
226
Zhenhui Laoren (Wang Daiyu), 373
Zhongming (Yang Jingxiu), 373
Zihni Efendi, Mehmet, 200, 202
Ziyada, May, 70
Zubaydi, Ahmad ibn Ahmad al-,
207, 208
Zubcevic, Asim, 198
Zufar ibn al-Hudhayl, 161
Zuhri, Muhammad ibn Muslim, 56
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11